The Sun. — London, England, 1821-07-09 00:00:00

24crivelsby held hislands on the condition of finding a Champion ' on the King's Coronation. But could the Lord cf this =not' demand the Coronation of his Majesty, in other that he might perform theservice of finding the Champion ? Undoubtedly not ; because if there was no Coronation, the condition on which the lands were held had not taken effect. To show that this was aright in a Queen, although enforced only by Pro clamation, her Counsel had put the case of prizes during the time of war, which prizes were enjoyed by the captors, only by the medium of the Proclamation; A moment's examina tion would shew that the analogy was forced. The case of a captor was that of - a vested interest; air interest actually -vested by the same Act of Parliament, which directed the Proclamation. Let the Queen's Counsel shew the vested in terest in this supposed right ; and the analogy would be ad missible ; but the right itself was the very question in issue. A strong inference against the claim might be drawn from the uniform language of the Coronation Proclamation. Abundant proof might be drawn from that source, that the right of having a Coronation existed only in the Soverc.ign. It WM also to be observed,-that the Queen in the present case not only claimed a Tight . to be crowned ; but also claimed the right of fixing the particular time. The circumstance of the claim being made in that Shape, furnished fresh arguments against it ; .but he felt that there was no necessity to avail himself of them. He was content to meet his Hon. Friends on the broad question. The circumstance, however, of fixing the particular day rendered it evident that the prize act, which had been quoted by his Hon. Friend, was not analogous to the present-case. He had argued against the existence of the right at any time, and he hoped he had by this time satisfied their Lordships that no such right ex isted- He feared he had not done the case the _justice its im portance required. He really assured their Lordships that the -principal difficulty in this case was, the clearness of the position he had to establish. Every Gentleman at the Bar knew that an advocate feared a clear case more than an obscure one ; as he couli not assist the former, and lie might explain the latter. He admitted the great ability which had been displayed .by her :Majesty's Counsel in arguing the case. His Learned Friend the Attorney-General for the Queen, had certainlydelivered to their Loniships, a most able historical detail. He had avoided going fully into that part of hiS Learned Friend's case, because he ad mitted the main facts, but - denied the inferences drawn frOni those facts, and,this was the qUestion for their Lordships' decision.— He had no doubt that this impcirtant subject would receive their LerJahipa' mast grave consideration. Before he quitted the . subject, he begged leave particularly to draw their Lordships' egeention to the fact, that this was d claim which, in legal lan guage, Was called " of first .impression,"-imposing upon the cisirnant the necessity of proving the right with great strict- - . reess. Such a right was never known to be-claimed before, and, if it were, as his Honourable Friends - contended, of such im portatee to the people, and to the Queen, how did it happen that no one historian or laW-writer had ever treated it as a right? Notrace was to be found of any such. opinion being held by any writer—no hint even was ever thrown out to that effect.— Alehiatory was a blank on the subject of such a right ; it was rot supported by statutory enachnents—by any dictum of law —by any passage in an able text writer ; it depended entirely fcc :rapport upon usage, and usage he thought he had sfiewn was -against the claim. The amount of' the facts appeared to be that Queens Consort had occasionally, usually if his Honour able Friend preferred that word, been crowned. But allowing his Learned Friends the utmost latitute of argument that could be derived from that deduction, he did not see how they could establish that the Coronation of a Queen Consort was demand able as a right. With respect to the distinction endeavoured to be established between the circumstances of a Queen being mar riad at the time of the Coronation, or afterwards,. he had only to say that he denied that any such distinction existed either in principle or in practice. Though the Queen was high both in dignity and in privilege, it should not be forgotten that she was neiniore than a subject. Yet she claimed a political character approaching to sovereignty. She had no political character wrach required that she should be known or recognized at the Coronation. She might be honoured by the King with this mark of favour and attention, but he confidently submitted that tier Counsel had failed in producing a shadow of authori ty in support of her claim as a right. The SOLICITOR-G-ENER.II. assured their Lord ships, that, in being called upon to address them on this subject, he felt himself in a situation of peculiar difficulty, coinciding, as he did, with all the opinions just delivered by his Learned, Friend. Having given their opinions together upon the subject before, having consulted the same docu rsrents, and in all respects pursued the same course of inquiry, it would be impossiblei after his Learned Friend's able arguments, to throw pv..r'tdltinnul light on a subject so clear in sible, without meaning any disrespict to me elaborate historical arguments and details of the Learned Attorney-General for the Queen. The question divested of that, resolved itself into the narrowest possible compass. His Learned Friend opposite had adduced but one argument in sup. port of this claim : he alluded to that of uninter rupted, use and enjoyment; and upon this they must stand or fall. When looking to the right claimed., their Lordships should be satisfied of the circumstances under which the us e a nd enjoy ment were said to give it. The Learned Coun sel for the Queen should have strewn when this right was claimed, and exercillsed as such ; and also, that it was not conferred by the grace and favonr of the Crown. The case of right of way and common which was introduced, rather made against than . for the claim now asserted, because it might have been a hostile right, or an act of usurpation. If evidence were offered of the enjoyment of a right of way, it would be competent in those who opposed it as a right, to shew that the enjoyment in question was hostile, permissive, or even manda tory, but all with the assent of the owner of the seil. Even a case might arise out of the very ceremonial, which rested on the same principle as the present claim—he alluded to the case of persons summoned to attend the Coronation. But would it be said, because certain persons usually were summoned, it was absolutely neces sary they should now be called ? If this claim sseTe admitted, these persons mast be called ; if it were not necessary they should be so called, this claim must then of necessity be refused. Beside this, the language of the Proclamations, which scarcely varied since the time of Charles the First, all tended to shew that the right of having a Coronation performed, was altogether at the will and - discretion of the king. " We have decreed" is the language which they used—and how this could be reconciled with the substantive, independent right of the Queen, be was - totally at a loss to imagine. 'Were the Privy. Council to take the usage by itself to support the right, or to draw the inference of right from usage in connection with the circumstances compounded . with it ? The ter appeared to him to be the course which their Lordships ought to pursue ; and in do iug so, then they would have to consider whe ther it was a right enjoyed by licence and authority from the Crown or an adverse right claimed independently . 0r the Crowd.' In the very outset of the case,. there was'-'one stance which afforded strong evidence that nega tived the right in respect of usage : lie alluded to the necessity of a .Royal Proclamation. The force .of this was felt by his Ldarned Friend Mr. Brougham, who endeavoured' to' evade it with great dexterity, and at the same time to misapply it in favour of his own. argument; for he said that when once the right 'svas established, the proclamation must issue as. a matter of course. This was a complete. fallacy. His Learned Friend the Attorney-Getrerad and himself re verted to this circumstance, merely for the pur pose of chewing in what manner the right was enjoyed, namely—by permission, by consent, by authority, and by the command of the Sovereign ;' and for the purpose of stewing that the Procla mation was, to be taken, in connection with the usage, to establish the right. It really ap peared to him that- the case, when considered, resolved itself into a dry, technical point of law (though surrounded _by circumstances of great splendour and pomp,) and must be treated as all Courts of Justice treated such questions. The claim, in this case, was founded upon uniform usage, and unless it was clearly established that such an usage existed, the ,claim must fall to the ground. Their Lordships had heard the authority of Lord Coke quoted on this subject. The authority of Lord Bacon, already referred to—a great and learned lawyer, a cotemporary historian of the times of which he wrote, and perfectly conversant with the subject of which he treated, was decisive, to shew that the Queens_ Consort had no right, as matter of usage, to be crowned ; but that when she was crowned, it was a matter of grace and favour conceded to her by her Royal husband. Speaking of the delay which had taken place in fixing the Coronation of the Queen of Henry the Seventh, he said, " It was long before Henry would condescend to allow the Queen the honour of a Coronation." Was it possible that any thing could be stronger than this ? Nor was there any trace in his writings, or in those of any other writer, that this delay was any infringement of a right. All that could be found on the subject, on the contrary, went to shew that it was matter of grace and favour. In another part of the writings of Lord Bacon, he said, " the King not yielding to her wishes to give her the honour of a matrimonial Crown." Again, in a subsequent passage, " having resolved at last to proceed to the Coronation of the Queen." Another concur rent authority to the same point, was Leland's Collectanea, in the Cotton Manuscripts of the British MuSeum. His Learned Friend, after all his industry and research upon the historical part of the casq, completely failed in making out the uniform usage on which he relied. Under the Saxon line, the privilege of Coronation had long existed before it was communicated to the Queens: Consort. According to the authority 1 of Selden,. it did not take place till after the tenth century, and then proceeded entirely from the King as matter of grace and favour—the King soliciting the Archbishop's benediction, &c. This was perfectly manifest from reference to every instance from the time of the Norman. Conquest. William the Conqueror was married at the time he came to the throne. The Queen of Stephen was not crowned with him ; but it was said by his Learned Friends, that there was a necessity and a convenience why Stephen should be crowned,alone. Why this very asser tion was an argument in favour of the view he took of the case, for, if this was an inherent right in Matilda, no necessity or convenience could de prive her of it. Henry 11. was married when he came to the Throne, and he was not crowned until a very considerable period after his acces sion, because he considered that he held by so strong a title, that there was no necessity for hastening his Coronation. Their Lordships I .e„mutaltz l ,y,s. keen_irr_ visw, that this claim was The fact was, that Henry Meanie to the Throne in December, 1154, and he was not crowned until 1158, and his Queen was not crowned until 1159. The argument founded upon immemorial usage, i n, this instance, therefore, completely failed. Then as to the instance of Prince Henry, the Coronation of his Princess took place in con sequence of the remonstrance of Lewis, who thought that the abstaining to crown his daugh ter with her husband, was a reflection upon his own Royal dignity, and therefore the ceremony took place, but only in time light of favour and grace. So much then as to that historical fact. Richard the First was twice crowned. Ile was not married when he was first crowned, and he was not in the country when he was crowned a se cond time. He chose to be crowned a second time after his return from captivity in Germany. This was a new proof of the Coronation being at the will and pleasure of the Sovereign.— As to the case of John, lie was married at the time of his Coronation, but his wife, Elizabeth of Gloucester, was not crowned with him. it was said, however, that the reason why she was not crowned, was because John was then seeking the hand of Isabella of Angouleme in marriage. That was not the fact, because the thoughts of his courtship with that Princess were not entertained until a whole year after his Coronation. •He was crowned in the month of May, 1199, and it was not until the month of May, I'2oo, that his attach ment for Isabella began. It was said that there were some, doubts as to the validity of John's marriage with his first wife, but history proved that he lived with her nine years afterwards.— From the period of the Conquest, therefore, there were four Kings who were married at the time of their respective Coronation, and not one of their four Queens was crowned with her Consort. These were facts too stub born, even for his Learned Friend's ingenuity, great as it was, to grapple with. He should add nothing more to what had been said by the At torney-General as to the case of Henry the Seventh. It was quite clear that that Monarch delayed his marriage as long as policy and ex pedienCy would suggest. That brought him to the reign of Henry VIII. and the Learned Soli citor repeated all the observations made by his Learned Coadjutor upon the different marriages of that Monarch, to show that the argument in support of the right in respect of uninterrupted usage was not bottomed in fact. It was no suf. ficient reason why Henry VIII. did not crown Lady Jane Seymour, his favourite wife, as it had been said, that the Church was then in a dis turbed and distracted state ; for never were the Clergy of this country in so abject a state of tyranny and thraldom as at that time, when the Monarch took upon himself, with his own hand, to alter the Mass-book ; and nothing could have been more easy . for him than to command the performance of the august ceremony. The solu tion of time difficulty, therefore, resorted to by his Learned Friends, availed them nothing. Ca therine Howard was charged with the of fence, of which she was found guilty six teen months after her marriage t and it was k curious fact, that but - a short time before she was so charged, the King lived so happily with her that he ordered the Archbishop of Canterbury to prepare a form of thanksgiving to the A knight for having blessed him with such a wife. Ye he had no thought of having her crowned. „With Catherine Parr, who was one of the most import ant instances, he lived in the most perfect union for five years. Next, as to the case of Charles 1., it was perfectly certain that his wife Henrietta was not crowned with him. If that Queen was entitled to be crowned, as a matter of right, she could not have waived it ; but being a matter in the pleasure of the King, it was quite easy to assign a sufficient reason for her not being crowned. But what was to be said of the Con sort of Charles the Second ? His Hon. Friends here said that the objection to be crowned in her case, was the Catholic Religion. The same argument they used with respect to James the Second, and were at last driven to the ingenious argument that the objections must be stronger in the case of a Catholic and Protestant, than in the case of two Catholics. This then was the course of uniform, uninterrupted usage upon which the case of his Learned Friend rested. From the time of the Norman Conquest six Queens had enjoyed the honour of Coronation—seven had not been crowned. This was proof that the uninterrupted usage even was not made out. But when their Lordships considered that the usage operated a 11 one way, and that against the claim, what would their Lordships say of the right ? In his historical argument his Learned Friend left England, and stated that there was no instance of Scottish Queens not being crowned. lie must inform his Learned Friend, however, that he was not to make assertions, and leave him to prove the negative. If he rested his case upon the law of the case, he must shew that precedent existed in favour of his argument. It was for him to make out the affirmative first, and not for those whose business was only to prove the negative. With respect to the case of the Queen of James of Scotland, it was very natural that he should desire that she should be crowned in the troubled state of his Kingdom. He had a young family, was at war with his Barons, .and in case of his being killed, he thought it prudent to cause the oaths of fealty and allegiancelo be taken to his Queen, as well as himself. His Honourable Friends had shewn great anxiety to get possession of a book called Libel- Regalis ; but what he had made of it to benefit his case he knew not. It ap peared from his Learned Friend's statement, ,that sometimes when the King was crowned he had a Queen ; that sometimes he had not. — Sometimes the Queen was crowned at the same time as the King, sometimes afterwards. Thus, therefore, it was not a matter of course ; for it was changed from time to time, and every part of the ceremonial was under the controul of the Kilo . . Their Lordships' attention had been particularly directed to the circumstance of this being a claim 44 of first impression." No such right had before been urged; and it there fore became necessary to adduce all that bore the stamp of authority on the subject. Black stone, ,who was one of the law advisers of the po efh eatif nihi? t - ed ? It had also been argued that this right was the more imperative in the case of the Queen, as the rights of others depended upon it, in the shape of certain tenures of lands which were held con tingent to the performance of certain offices at the Coronation of the Queen. But these services were done to the King, in honour of the Queen. —Of this description was that which imposed„ upon a certain' person the duty of carrying a banner before the King in time of war. —Was it therefore to be claimed as a right that the King should be compelled to make war, in order that this person might per form his duty of bearing the banner ? The en joyment of this honour was claimed by his Hon. Friends as a right. They contended, on the contrary, that the enjoyment and exercise of the privilege was at the sufferance, subject to the will, and the sole right of the Crown. If their Lordships were satisfied that it was so, his Learned Coadjutor and himself had not failed in the course they had taken. They had in fact done more than was incumbent on them. They had not only disproved the case of their oppo nents, but shown that no other case could have been made out. Mr. BRouGn.km, after retiring for a few mi nutes, with the permission of the Council, then replied to the arguments of the Attorney and Solicitor-General. his Learned Friends were mistaken in supposing that he relied upon the necessity of a proclamation issuing, as evidence of the Queen's right to be crowned. Ile'had merely mentioned it by way of anticipating the argument which might be drawn from it on the other side, and of rebutting the presamp, tion which would probably be raised, upon it.' He contended that the ,language of the - usual proclamation on such occasions, was merely the mode of allowing the ,right, which was to be con sidered as cx_debitunr. justitio, and not ex gratin. The like language was used in writs of error and other writs, which of right belonged to the sub ject. In this point of view the proclamation was to be considered merely, as a writ of Coronation, conferring no favour on the Queen, but giving her that which she had a right to demand. The Coro-, nation proclamation was analogous to the writs issued by the Crown in the event of the decease of a Peer. His son inherited his rights without the writ, which conferred no new title or privilege upon him ; but still. he could not exercise his rights without. His Hon. Friends relied much upon the language of the Proclamations. They seem ed to think cc We have resolved"—" His Majesty has determined," &c. proved that the existence of what his -Majesty resolved on was contingent • on his will. But be did not see that it was incon sistent with the existence of a right, that the writ by which it -was enjoyed should say that the party was resolved upon issuing that writ, in or der that • it might be enjoyed. An Executive might be willing that justice should lie done without diminishing the right of those concerned to-that-justice. AYith respect to. the word "Pos. ; lulanius," if it proved any thing, it proved too much ; for, if the word were any thing more than a matter of course, it shewed that it was op tional in the Archbishop to grant the favour asked of him, or not. Then his Inn. Friends said, that the Coronation of the Queen was no thin," hitt a. mere pageant, possessing no political importtace. "The very words .41;:h*N1 had been 'quoted as proof of this, however, refuted the position ; for it was called a " Royal ornament," au " outward solemnization." Now, he asked, of what was it a solemnization, if not' of the mar riage of the Queen with the King, and there fore, as affecting the descent, of public impor tance. It was an outward public acknowledg ment of the legitimacy of the marriage, to put it beyond question that there was any flaw in the descent. His Honourable Friends said he had no right to separate the cases of a King married when he was crowned, and of one married after wards. There - was this distinction, that it became more necessary for a King to make this public acknowledgment of a marriage contracted whilst only heir apparent, than when he was in posses sion of the Crown, and his acts therefore'more open to public view, and resting upon responsible advisers. This was, no doubt, the original inten tion in crowning Queen. Consorts. He applied himself to the four exceptions to his general proposition, and concluded that they were all to be explained by the circumstances under hich they occurred. He then went into a detail of the historical facts connected with the cases of exception adduced by his Learned Friend, and shewed that in the cases of William the Con queror, Henry 1., Stephen, and Henry 11., it was physically impossible that the Queens of those Monarchs should have been crowned with them, they not being present in the country at the occurrence of those solemnities. In all those cases a separate solemnity was, however, fixed and performed as soon as the first op portunity occurred. With regard to the in stance' of the Queen of Charles the First, the answer of his Learned Friend the Solicitor-Ge neral did not appear to be so triumphant as he seemed to imagine. The arguments which he (Mr. Brougham) had used with regard to the circumstances under which that exception oc curred, so far from being inconsistent with each other—so far from being incompatible, in his opinion they went to fortify each other. Ile then alluded to the treaty entered into with re gard to the marriage of Prince Charles and Hen rietta Maria, as it was set forth in Aymer's Fcc dera. In this treaty the ceremony was appointed, and on account of the differences in religion, great pains were taken to prevent umbrage being given to the various religions of the parties af fected by the contract. Now, if this was ne cessary with regard -to a marriage ceremony, would not the same views be taken in considera tion upon the solemnity of a Coronation ? Upon these grounds it was perfectly consist ent for the Queen not to wish to be crowned, for the fear of bringing odium upon herself, and for the King to consent, for the sake of preventing discontent among the subjects. It had been con tended by his Learned Friends, that a public right could not have been waived by the Queen ; but he never contended that it had. She only NI v anCIL tillelUy an In jury was done to the realm. But that waiver could not destroy —it only suspended the right, which suspension could not weigh against the general usage and the original existence of the right. Ile had yesterday illustrated this by the practice of the Courts of Law, with regard to rights of common,where exceptions or suspensions of right had occurred. He then argued upon the distinction to be taken betwixt services to be performed at aCo ronation of a Queen Consort,and the on orousor ho norary offices about the person of the King, such as following him to the wars, or carrying a ban ner before him. To follow Lim in time of war was originally onorous upon those who held cer tain manors and lands, and in consequence of their services in the wars, they were elevated to the honorary office of• carrying a banner before him. Of exactly such a nature was the office of sword-bearer to the King ; the reward of some onorons duty which had been performed with zeal and distinction. Undoubtedly the appointments to do similar services to the Queen must have been made under similar circumstances. The case of the Chamberlain, which he mentioned yes terday. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed, that there was no mention of that claim or right upon the records. Mr. BROUGHAM said that it was contained in the Red Book of the Exchequer, - and he read , the passage to their Lord ships the day before. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied, that the claim had been disallowed at the Coronation of James 11. and two others ; and be did not believe that it was panted at that of Richard H. Mr. BROUGHAM had found it in the Testa de Neville, and in the Roll of the Knights' Fees, and there was no doubt but the claim had been allowed. The right of the Queen to be crowned must be substantial and independent, or how could such rights as he had shewn to exist ever have derived their origin. They must have grown out of her.right, and were as much connected with it as others were with the Coronation of the King. lle contended that the nature of Grand . Sergeantry did not,confine it to mere personal services done about the body of the King, but to any offices done in his parks or elsewhere. It must, then, likewise extend to all his family connexions, and unquestion ably all services rendered to his Consort at the time of her Co rom:tion must be Grand Sergeantry, as well as any other duty performed whatsoever. As to the allusion to the Scottish Act of Parliament, there was no weight whatever to be attached to that. His Learned Friends said that the words, Domine nostrw Regime were peculiar to the particular Act in which they were contained, and they rested upon the pronoun as referring to-that Queen alone. 'Whereas it was evident that nostrce was only used_ as an expression of form. if his Learned Friends would turn to the head of the very chapter in which this passage occurred,they would find, as in all other places, that the Sovereign was men tioned in the same manner. The words used were " Domine nostio Rege." With respect to Lord Bacon's remarks upon the omission of crowning Elizabeth, the Consort of Henry VII. for some considerable time, lie only spoke as an historian, not- as a lawyer. He merely stated what the. facts were, without giving any opinion upon the question of right or legal power in the Monarch to delay the ceremony. It was clear that the York faction held it to be the, Queen's right; as the head i)f . that faction, Margaret of Burgundy, expressed herself, because it had been the practice with all Queens from the Conquest downwards. With regard to the Queens of Henry VIII., his Learned Friend, the Attorney-General, only stated that four of them were not crowned, without bringing forward one Scin tilla of evidence in proof of his assertion. He then proceeded to explain 'the probable causes why the Consorts of Henry VIII. were not crowned. But let his Learned Friend shew one case where the claim was made, and the right refused. This, he con tended, they were utterly unable to do. He had now concluded, his arguments, and his , observations upon that which had been adduced against them by his Darned Friends. He beseeched their Lordships - to'bear in mind the propositions, which, he was confident, he had satisfactorily made out. if so, it was con-. trary to all analogy in the constitutional law, or in the impe rial law of these realms, to say that the rights of the Queen to partake of the - solemnity of a coronation, only existed at the will or,pleasure of any individual. • Howsoever; their Lord, ships shvuld decide upon the strict legal right . ; when all the circumstances of the Q u een' s c l a i m to be crcivtpd, and et die high and ancient rights connected, and so inseparably' woven with it, were taken into view, even upon the groun I of expediency and propriety, it would be almost a criminal ad in any Council to advise the Sovereign to set the first xample of the omission of that high solemnity. Shortly before four o'clock Mr. 13fiotrmiAst cone ed, apck strangers wew ordered to withdraw. The Plilir \ ccintil. after-% wards adjouriteti to. Tdesday next.,, .1 1 11 k A WINCHESTER. SEVENTH REPORT of the WINCHtSTER Dia; CESAN and. DISTRICT COMMITTEE, in AID of the SOCIETY for PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE, 1821. The early, part of last year wore an aspect unfriendly to me. rality and religion. Infidelity and blasphemy were spreading, far and wide, their pestilential poison, and the most indefati gable industry was directed to the overthrow of Christianity, and, with it, of every thing sacred and venerable in the country in which we have the happiness to live. The evil was of such a magnitude, - and so extensiVe had been its progress, that the friends of good order and religion felt: themselves bound, in an especial manner, to call into action alt the means within their power to check and counteract the dread ful consequences which must inevitably have ensued, arei which are still to be seriously apPreliended, from such auda-i cious licentiousness. Accordingly, the earnest attention of the, Society was directed to the subject ; a Committee was'appointed for the special purpose of counteracting blasphemous and in , fidel publications, and was entrusted with full discretionary powers, under a Committee of Superintendance, suited to, meet the exigencies of so extraordinary a crisis. They were in-' strutted to invite contributions from the public in aid of their designs, and not only to publish, in a more popular form , and at a diminished charge, the tracts relating to these subjects which were already on the Society's list, but to provide and cir culate at the lowest prices such other books and tracts as might, in their judgment, be best suited to the object in view. . They were also instructed to enter into innnediate correspondence with the Diocesan and District Committees in various parts of the country. The zeal and energy with which their communications were met by this Diocesan Committee, and by several other District Committees within this diocese, were briefly noticed in the last Annual Report. It was then also stated that an itinerant agent had been taken into employ for the purpose of circulating, more effectually, such tracts as were best calculated to arrest the progress of the evil. This Committee have very great satisfaction in reporting that the said agent conducted himself, during the whole time that he was so employed, in a manner which entitled him to their approbation and thanks, having uniformly rendered the most efficient service in forwarding their views, and supplying them with accurate information as to the extent to which the evil had been carried. From this it appeared that though the poison of infidelity had been, in several places, covertly and industriously circulated, yet it did not existto such a degree as to preclude the hope that the measures adopted to counteract its effects might, under Providence, be successful. The sum subscribed in this deanery alone, for these special purposes, amounted to 1141. ; and there were distributed, partly gratuitously, partly at very reduced prices, above 7500 book 3 and tracts on such subjects as might prove an antidote to the poison which had been so mischievously administered. Th e re is a residue of 381. 13s. Bd. to be applied to a similar or arli other purpose which may be thought most desirable. The anti-infidel tracts were dispersed also in the deaneries of Droxford, Southampton, Fordingbridge and Andover, considerable success, particularly Bishop Watson's Apolog for the Bible, and Bishop Porteus's Summary of the Evidence s of Christianity. The Committee have also great satisfaction m stating a t the same time, that the circulation of Bibles, Testaments, Praf er Books, and other books and tracts, which arc always to be mad at the depdts of the several District Committees, has been coil' siderable. There have been distributed, during the last year'. Bibles. Test. P. Books. Psalt. Tracts` In the Deanery of Win chesterd Sombourne, 176 145 598 resfor sing and d 7 Deanery of Basingstoke 94 95 480 67 „4 "' 2 Deanry of Alton - - 123 137 219 53 ~4 1 Tl , onery of Southampton 7:2 40 280 -- 4 " Deanery of Droxford - 110 100 730 75 109? Dcaury of runtingbnClge 89 " 97 443 92 ' 1 Deanry of Andover - 24 • 80 163 40 121 ,oti 695 2933 240 583 3 This Committee were happy to have it in their power to pre' sent gratuitously 200 copies of Bishop Gibson's Advice to Yet" sons lately recovered from Si c kness, and 100 copie s of. Sir J. Stonhouse's Friendly Advice to a Patient, to the County 1 1 ° 5 " pital for the use of the patients ; which were thankfully' ,re ceived by the Committe e o f G ove rnors o f th a t exce ll e nt Insti tution. tution. A Sermon was preached at Lymington in June last, by th c t . Rev. Ellice Jones, Secretary to the Fordingbridge Distr4 Committee, after which a collection amounting to 131. 105. • was made for the benefit of the Society. It has been resolved also in that deanery, to request the cler gymen of the several parishes to preach a Sermon once in e'en . ' three years, for the purpose of bringing into more ger' er knowledge the nature and designs of the Society, and at thg same time to make a collection for its use and benefit. jet , It is in contemplation to open a new b ranc h o f the Pistr Committee at Droxford, as bein g more conven i e nt for th e , northern part of that deanery, a nd th e p resen t cura t e of p r° , -- r y ford, the Rev. Mr. G ra nt, h as b een recommen d e d a s a v ery proper Secretary for that purpose. In reporting the transactions of the last year, this Com mitte , e i cannot omit the opportunity of adverting, with sentirnen! s :4 respect and regret, to the death of their late venerable Presider and Diocesan, under whose sanction and authority they w " first embodied, and who contin u ed, t o the' last, to extend to them his cordial co-operation and support. His Successor i° the See has kindly accepted the office of President, and Iv', expressed an. interest in the future co n tin ua nce and uulity their proceedings. ot It is matter of considerable gratification and encourage lll s.„ to this Committee to obser v e, th a t in th e l as t Report of the ciety, mention is made of the great assistance which it c ontint!'; to derive from the co-operation of the Diocesan and Dists , " 4 Committees, now so generally established, and that its des i b i t for the promotion of Christian knowledge are thereby. mu facilitated and extended. The words in which that a ssistan c is acknowledged will form a suitable and proper coneltisio n e., this Report, and are well calculated to stimulate to future &"" increased exertion. " The transactions and concerns of the Diocesan and °fall " trict Committees have been conducted with zeal, a bility, "' at , " diligence. Every separate object of the society has he °ll ,l in tentiveY kept in view, and its designs have been promo-coot " many instances with indefatigable exertion, and the Lo t, " cordial co-operation. They,look forward on this aecr.6o " with sanguine hope to the continued. proess of ch t r' s " knowledge by these'means, and they anticipate the geThbo " fects winch, in every Diocese of the Empire, will atteoLiel., " endeavours thus zealously pursued to enlighten the lwielr 44 standing, and to exercise a salutary influence over the " gious conduct of the ignorant and uninstructed." By order of the Conimittee, LISCOMBE CLARKE } r:t * JAMES HODGES, Secreta f FO P Account of the Fund raised for the speci a l P ur p os e ~0 0 - chasing, and distributing, Anti-Infidel Tracts.-I°'," DECEIVED. Donations - - - 11 4 3"" For Tracts sold . - - la 1 0 16 43* ToLli From the Southampton Committee, 4 Week s ) 6 u Remuneration of the Itinerant Agent . 5 ___-------1, 1".1t2 1 ' tic .1:. '' 1 O Carriage of Tracts - - " " - 040 4 0 Hawkers Licence - " " " " " 0 9 / Paper - - - - - - - - 41 3 Four Bills for Tracts, from London - - Extra Tracts, purchased of the Diocesan Corn- 1 016 41 1 mittee - . - - 1 0 3 For Tracts purchased of the Southampton J. 6 Committee - - - 1 3 ), j 5 ,4 0 Advertisements and Printing - - - - 31 i 0 T.o the Itinerant Agent employed to sell the Tracts 0 1 i For a Wrapper - - - - - 0 0 Donation to the Assistant Secretary, in considc- 2 ration of additional Employment, respect:ng 3g 14 13 1 i the Tracts - - - - - - Balance (in hand) - . . 13$ 14 a i • _________. . , - * besides four parochial libraries, consisting of . 20,V01i each. nlteS.. PAID.