The Sun. — London, England, 1850-06-08 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, June 7. Their Lordships met at Five o'clock. NAVY PRIZE BALANCE BILL. This Bill was read Pa ETITIO third time and passed. NS. The Duke of RICHMOND presented several petitions praying fur increased accommodation to assistant surgeons in the navy, among them one from the Royal College of Surgeons in London; also from several out pensioners of Chelsea Hospital praying for the repeal of a clause in the Act 9 and 10 Victoria, depriving them of their pensions. He thought that every accommoda tion ought to be afforded to assistant-surgeons in the navy, and he hoped that some alteration would take place in the present arrangements. The Earl of MINTO said that great misapprehension existed.as to the nature of the accommodation afforded to assistant-surgeons in the navy. A double cabin had been appropriated to their use some time since, immediately after the report of the Naval and Military Commission, in order to enable them to pursue their studies. They had in many instances converted that cabin into a store ,-oom ; but he believed arrangements had now been made .to remove all causes of complaint on their part that they had no separate place of study. Re believed a portion of the sick bay was now appropriated for that purpose. Lord BROUGHAM presented several petit i o ns pray ing for the extension of the County Courts. The traders of London, Manchester, and Leeds did not object to the principles of Mr. Fitzroy's Bill, but to certain of the details. The Earl of HARROWBY presented several peti tions praying for a repeal of the Sale of Beer Act. The Earl of RODEN presented several petitions •gainst Post-office Sunday labour. kDMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPROVEMENT BILL. On the motion of Lord CAMPBELL, this Bill was read a third time and passed. CHELSEA PENSONERS. In answer to a question - from the Duke of RICHMOND,. Earl GREY said, under an Act of George IL, a de duction of 5 par cent. was made from all out-pensioners paid at Chelsea Hospital. In 1847 a Bill was passed doing away with the poundage, bat it was not retrospec tive in its operation. This was equivalent to giving the pensioners a boon of 50,000/. per annum. Upon that law being passed the pensioners imagined they had claims fur the arrears of former deductions, than which nothing could be more illusory. PIRATICAL INVASION OF CUBA. Lord BROUGHAM wished to ask his Noble Friend (the Marquis of Lansdowne) if he had any information to give the House relative to reports of an alarming nature, which he hoped would prove groundless. He understood that an expedition had sailed from the United States, to take possession of Cuba. He had no doubt whatever but that this was without the consent of the Government of the United States.—(Hear, hear.) He confessed he had too much respect for the Ameri can Government to suppose that any assent would be given by them to such a proceeding. He was just in formed by his Noble Friend to his great sorrow that the expedition had escaped the Spanish fleet, and had (we understood) effected a landing at Cardenas. Now, he sincerely hoped these execrable pirates—for pirates they were undoubtedly in the strictest sense of the term, their object being piratically to plunder and make war on harmless, unoffending people—he repeated he sincerely hoped they would meet with that condign punishment they merited. He hoped his Noble Friend would state if he bad received any information from the American Minister on the subject, or whether any communications had passed between our own and the American Govern ment. He could not avoid saying that the American. Government, being such a respectable Government, and charged with the maintenance of peace and amity be tween the United States and other nations, would be found, at the same time, endowed with sufficient strength and power to prevent its subjects from sending out large armed expeditions from its shores for the purpose of making war on unoffending sta'es. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, who throughout spoke in a more than usually subdued undertone, was understood to say he did not know that be could give the Noble Lord more information than he already pos sessed—namely, that a piratical expedition, for piratical it was in the worst sons.) of the term, had set out from the United States for Cuba; but it was not only without the cognizance, but subject to the disapprobation or the United States Government, who entirely disapproved of these. proceedings. Information had recently been received from the Consul at New Orleans that the pirates had landed at Cardenas. The matter (we un derstood) was under the consideration of her Majesty's Government. Lord BROUGHAM said it was was impossible to en tertain a doubt of the American Government discoun tenaneing this expedition. He should, however, have been more satisfied had his Noble Friend been able to give more direct information on that point. His Noble Friend had justly, wisely, and correctly said this expe dition was piracy of the worst description. Common piracy had for its end individual plunder and wrong, whereas this piratical expedition contemplated wholesale plunder and bloodshed, and to carry fire and sword into a pacific country in alliance with us and with the Ame rican states also. Reprobation of such doings was all very well; but he thought in such a case something more definite should be done by the American Government. The Marquis of LA.NSDOWNE said that the Go vernment of the United States had not only expressed their disapprobation, but had ordered their naval forces to endeavour to intercept the expedition. He did not know what the American Government might do next, but certainly as far as the American Government could defeat the object of the expedition they had done what ever they could do. Lord BROUGHAM said that this addition to the answer of his Noble Friend was more satisfactory, but he could not understand how 8,000 men could be armed and seat off without the knowledge of the Government. The Earl of ABERDEEN believed that the Govern ment of the United States had done the utmost to stop the expedition, and he regretted that twenty years ago, when the United States suspected us of unlawful dealings in the island, they had not united with us and France in guaranteeing the island to Spain. The island of Cuba for some time past had beon supposed to be an object of desire to various powers. We ourselves were strongly suspected of having some design on that island. He re• collected twenty years ago, when he was in office, some thing of this was said, and he very much regretted that the United States did not at that time assent to a propo sition which he made; for if they had done so, they would have been enabled to do the only thing they had not done on the present occasion. Twenty years ago, when the American Government thought fit to suspect England of an unlawful desire to possess Cuba, he pro posed that the American States and France should com bine with England in guaranteeing the island of Cuba to Spain. The United States Government did not agree with that proposition—though certainly at that time it was strongly suspected by the Government of the United States that England had some ulterior object with respect to Cuba. With respect to the present expedition, he hoped, however, the force in the island was sufficiently strong to gise a good account of those buccaneers who had undertaken the expedition. Lord BROUGHAM as a lawyer challenged con tra diction to this position that all civilized nations were bound to give aid against pirates, and that the com mander of any British cruiser would be guilty of a neg lect of duty if he did not aid the Spaniards against the pirates. Lord STANLEY said the House were discussing the question he was about to put to their Lordships. He begged to ask, for information, what was the course our Government were taking in this affair? And as it had been for a long time known that intentions were enter tained of sending out a piratical expedition to Cuba from the United States, he wanted to know whether any orders had been sent to the commander cf the Bri tish fleet in the West India station, and if so, whet orders? The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was not precisely aware of what the Amer i can Government had done. Lord STANLEY did not ask what the American Governm ent had d e o n e , but what the British Government had don e; w h ethe r on the announcement of the expe dition, any instrucrtions had been sent out to our nava l forces? The Marquia of LANSDOWNE, not having had previous notice of the question, could ' not state what in structions had been sent out t o our cruisers. Lord STANLEY wa s o f Cuba was not immaterial to Briti sh instructions had beentaethat it was not unlikely som e sent out to the West Indies. He therefore repeated his question, had any instructions been sent out at all ? srestthse, island of Earl GREY —In the present state of affairs, it would be a breach cf duty on the part of any Minister to an swer s uch a question at ad. He wa s surprised that, with his official experience, the Noble Baron should hav e asked it. Lord STANLEY — am not to be taught my duty by the Noble Earl opposite.—(hear, bear.) It is the right this hous e and duty of every Peer in to ask any questio n whereby he can ascertain whether her Majesty's Go eernment has performed its duty on a matter which con cerns deeply the honour an d the interests of this country. We have a right to ask wheth er any instructi ons have been sent to our commanders in th e West Indies, espe cially as it appears that this matter has been thoug ht worthy of being made the subject of intercommunica tions between our Government and that of the United States. I have put a question to her Majesty's Ilinisters, and I wish to know whether they will give me any an swer at all? Lord I3EAUMONT rose. Lord STANL EY _ I put the question to the Noble Marquis, w h o may or may not refuse to answer. It is from the Noble Marquis, therefore, I expect the cour tesy of a reply. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE did not deny the Right of the Noble Lurd to p ut the question, and he repeated what he had said, tha t the matter was under the consideration of the Government. Lard BEAUMONT wa s surprised The at the conduct of the Noble Lord (Stanley) an swer that the subject was under the consideration of th e which ought to satisfy him. Governm en t was one Lord BROUGHAM for his own part was sati s fi e d with the a nswer o f' the N o bl e marquis,- which amounted to this — we k now a b so l ute l y noth i ng He was not aware that t h ere was anything of the subj ect . thing like a d u t y incumbent either on the House collectively, or on N o bl e Peers individually, to stop an inquiry m ere l y because the Minister gave an answer with which another Peer thought that the House should be satisfied. The law was cl ear , these men were pirates;g d he h o p ed therefore there would b e no delicacy i n treating the and it was the duty of a ll w h o used t h e sea to conside r all those men as pirates, an d treat them accordingly asrttlei pirates had been treated by R a ja Brooke. They had, according to some persons, been treated a little too much so; though he did not agree in that opinion, he thought Raja Brooke had treated those persons properly. The Earl of ABERDEEN thought that as we were not on amicable terms with Spain during the time this expedition was preparing, it would be advisable that we should show that we had not been lukewarm in our interference to put a stop to it. It might be thought that we took advantage of that c ircumstance to neglect taking the proper steps a g ainst this piratical expedition. And, to prevent such a suspicion, her Majesty's Govern ment ought to show that they were not lukewarm in the exercise of their duty towards an ally. If they did so they would justly be exposed to blame. Earl GREY could not understand how the Nolols Lord couldattempt to make a grave charge against his policy. They looked on the expedition in the same light as the American Government and the Noble Lord. Undoubtedly the expedition was piratical; but it was a very different thing to say her Majesty's Government had had their attention called to the subject from answering questions as to the precise nature of the instructions given to the British naval Commander-in-Chief. Their Lordships must be aware that to give information as to the instructions given to the naval commanders in the West Indian seas could not but be exceedingly detrimental until we should have received further adviccs from the West Indies. No one could deny our right to check piracy; but it was a difficult question as to the length we ought to go in a particular instance. The subject then dropped. The Bills on the table were forwarded a stage, and their Lordships adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 7. DRAINAGE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND THE SUN, ADVANCES BILL (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. E WART thought that the fact had not been sufficiently taken into consideration, that this was a limited sum, and that they had to decide what was the best use to be made of it. He thought that it ought to be confined entirely to drainage, for if they went to the building of farms, buildings, and such things they would have nothing left for drainage. He thought that it would be decidedly most advantageous for the public interest to spend the whole sum in drainage. Captain PELHAM thought that the objection might be got over by limiting the sum to be applied to build ing purposes entirely to new buildings. Mr. BUCK thought that it would be far better to confine the sum entirely to the purposes of drainage. Mr. SLANEY said that if the Chancellor of the Ex chequer did not give some facility to the small proprie tors in making their applications, the Bill would not be of the slightest us 6 to them. He also thought that these advances should be extended to the purposes of new buildings at least. Mr. MOODY opposed the clause. Mr. DEEDES on the whole would prefer that the clause should stand in its present condition if they could be assured that the money could be lent with safety for the purposes of building. Mr. BRUCE was in favour of the clause as far as Scotland was concerned; he was sure great benefit would arise from it to that country, and especially to the new farms which were formed. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said his purpose had been answered by the discussion which had taken place; and as the present majority of Members appeared in favour of the omission of the clause, he would vote for its omission. Colonel RAWDON hoped that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not consent to omit the clause. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought that the House wished to omit the clause, and he was perfectly willing to consent. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the clause ... ... 45 Against it ... 107 Majority ---62 The clause was consequently rejected. Clauses 5,6, and 7 were then agreed to, with some slight amendments. On clause 8 being proposed, Mr. ROCHE proposed to insert in line 30, after "farm buildings," the words, " including buildings for the steep ing, drying, and cleaning of flax, and also such machi nery and apparatus for the above-mentioned purposes as may come under the denomination of fixtures." To show the advantage of promoting the growth of flax in Ireland, he need only mention that more than six mil lions worth of that commodity was imported into this country in a year, and that if it were brought into greater cultivation employment and support would be given to a very large number of families. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER op posed the amendment, thinking it would be most incon venient to advance money on the security of machinery, for that was, in fact, the natare of the amendment. He understood that, in many instances, machirery in the preparation of flax had been abandoned, and that the practice of preparing it by hand had been substituted. The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause agreed to. The other clauses having been agreed to, the House resumed, and the Chairman having reported progress, The House adjourned till Five o'Clock. The House resumed in the Old Chamber at Five o'clock. PETITIONS. Mr. C. LITSHINGTON presented a petition from Pimlico generally against the Interment Bill, and another petition from Brighton specifioally against the compensation clause. Mr. PIGOTT presented two petitions, one from the parish of Enville, in the county of Stafford, and another from the vicar, churchwardens, and other inhabitants of the parish of Worfield, in the county of Salop, against labour on Sundays in the Post-office. Mr. HAMILTON presented a petition from the clergy of Ireland, complaining of certain defects in the national system of education in Ireland; also a monster petition from the laity of Ireland to the same effect, signed by 17,000 persons. Mr. SEYMER presented a petition against the Savings Bank Bill. GENERAL POST-OFFICE. Mr. ANSTEY presented a petition from a number of individuals holding clerkships in the Money Order-office of the General Post-office, complaining of the re cent appointment of a gentleman to the office of chief clerk of that department. The petitioners stated that their claims to the appointment had been passed over, because they had refused to sign a written contradiction of the statements they had promulgated in a memorial which . was last year presented to the Treasury on the sub ject of their duties and salaries, and they therefore prayed the House to institute an inquiry into the matter. The Hon. and Learned Member moved that the petition be printed with the votes. Mr. THORNELY said it was very important for the House to consider whether they would put the country to the expense of printing for parties who might con sider themselves aggrieved by the conduct of their supe riors in any of the Government departments, no matter whether it were the Customs, the Excise, or the Post -office. It was for the House to consider whether or no it was right to make Parlia ment a court of appeal in matters like this. For his part he did not think it was, and he there fore put it to the House if it would not be better to leave the petition to be printed in the ordinary course of business. when it had come before the Committee on Public Petitions. Mr. DISRAELI hoped the House would hesitate be fore they accepted the views of the Hon. Geutleman who had just sat down.—(Hear, hear.) He had always understood that any party who felt himself aggrieved by the conduct of a public Department could appeal to that House for redress, if there was no other channel open to him, and he thought it would be exceedingly dangerous to interfere with that principle. That right of appeal indeed was part of the liberty of the subject.—(Hear.) Mr. FORSTER agreed with tbo Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, that the House ought to hesitate in this matter. The House held the head of each public department responsible for all its proceedings, but if the House interfered between them and their employes, how could they insist on maintaining that rule?—(Hear,) Mr. STUART said that was not quite the correct view of the matter. The question was not whether the House would interfere, but whether it would listen to a complaint.—(Hear, bear.) He understood that one ground of complaint was that the claims of these parties had been rejected because they had refused to work on a Sunday.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. W. PATTEN thought it would be better to defer this motion till the petition had been before the Com mittee on Public Petitions. Mr. HAYTER said the great inconvenience which resulted from stating the contents of petitions like this was, that they went forth to the world as if they were founded is truth. Now, so far from that being the case in this instance, he could assure the House that many statements in the petition were founded upon error.—(Hear, hear.) He should not pro perly discharge his duty if he did not say that most of those statements were founded in error. Colonel THOMPSON observed that the usage was that the House was bound to receive petitions but not to print them. - Sir G . GREY said the Ho n . M em b er seeme d t o imply that there had been an objection to th e rece ption of the petition; that w as no t so, the petitio n h av i n g been re ceived, an d the it should b e printe d wi th question now was, whether th the votes. The Chairman of the Committ ee on petitions shortly come before t hem, be had stated th a t it wou ld and they wou ld h ave to de cide whether it should printed or n o t, before it was Member competent for the Hon. to b r i ng a motion on the subject before the House. it was a practice which he (Sir G. Grey) thought very desirable the hoped the Hon House should follow, and d pr i e l sen lsiv t would abide by it on the . Member . After a few words from Mr. Brit " Lord DUDLEY STUART thought A i ß t D ' w ary the sirable and important that they should it very de rule of the House was with regard to the" printing of p e titions. He understo od that if an Hon. Memberwished to found a motion on any petition, it was pr t ite b n ep a ractice to allow him to move that it be with the votes.—(liear.) The p etition under discussionap peared to refer to a sub j ect of some im p ortance; and, as he thought it very proper that clerks in the Post-office should be enabled to state their grievances to the House, it seemed to him that the best way of allowing them . to do so was to print their petition. Lord J. RUSSELL observed that before the Hon. Gentleman could bring his motion before the House, the petition would have been before the Committee, and if by that time he found it had not been printed, it would be quite competent for him to make a motion on the subject. Mr. THORNELY said it was a question for the House to consider whether the complaint s of the clerks in the Post-office, in the shape of a petition, should be printed or not. Sir R. PEEL said if a Member presented a p etition, and thought the statements which it contained so well founded as to bring forward a motion with respect to it, he thought h t e-practice of the House was to permit that petition to be printed.—(Hear, hear.) Though he did not think that the House should constitute itself a court of appeal to hear the complaints of Go vernment officers, yet it would be a very unwise practice to refuse a petitio❑ to be printed on . that ground. The simple question was whether they should depart from that which had been the general usage, of having pe- titions printed in respect of which an Hon. Member in tended to bring forward a motion.—(Hear.) Colonel RAWDON said it had always been in the power of the House to prevent the printing of petitions, although it was in the power of any Member, at any time, to move that they be printed. Mr. BROTHERTON complained that many Mem bers gave notice of founding a motion upon a petition merely for the purpose of getting their petition printed, but who never seriously meant to bring that motion before the House.—(flear, bear.) Mr. ANSTEY disclaimed being actuated by any such motive as that mentioned by the Hon. Member for Sal ford (Mr. Brotherton). In this case he (Mr. Anstey) seriously meant to found a motion on his petition. Mr. GOULBURN did not think it was possible tha there could have been any partiality 'shown by the Chairman. After a short conversation, in which Mr. T. D'Eyn court, Mr. Horsman, Mr. Disraeli, and Mr. Hume took part, Strangers were ordered to withdraw, when Lord J. RUSSELL said he did not understand what the Hou. Member's object was, whether it was to have this petition printed in order to found a motion upon it or not. Mr. ANSTEY said he would repeat what he had said, and that was that he understood that petitions were printed for the purpose of calling the attention of Hon. Members more closely to them, and his object in moving that this petition be printed was that he might lay the ground for a future motion which he intended to found upon it. The SPEAKER then put the question, and the mo tion was agreed to without a division. RETURNS. Sir W. MOLESWORTH moved an address for a return of the annual receipt and expenditure of the colony of Hong Kong, made up to the latest period for which accounts have been received, showing the gross receipts from the various branches of revenue, under their different heads, distinguish ing the amounts levied in the colony from Parlia mentary grants, and stating the expenditure under its various branc hes (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper. No. 264, of session 1846). Similar return for New Zealand (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 328, of session 1844). And similar return for La buan. Also an address for return, in a tabular form, for the last year in which they can be made up, of the gross revenues, under their different heads, of each of her Majesty's colonies, exhibiting the costs of collection, and any deductions made in their progress to the public treasury. And similar return of the dis bursements of each colony, under their separate heads; showing the authority on which such disbursements are made (in continuation of part of Parliamentary Paper, No. 740, of session 1847).—Agreed to. ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION. Sir BENJAMIN HALL moved for a retura of all instructions or inquires issued by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to the archbishops and bishops, the answers to such instructions, and all data upon which the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England, before the Ist day of January, 1844, estimated and fixed the annual sums to be paid to the Com missioners out of the revenues of the larger sees, and to be paid by the Commissioners for augmen tation of the smaller bishoprics. Also, all returns of re venues or data upon which the Commissioners, after the Ist day of January, 1844, revised episcopal re• venues, and fixed an altered scale of payment, to take effect upon the avoidance of any see after the period of such revision, as well as any inquiries or in struction for supplying such last mentioned returns or data, addressed to the archbishops or bishops by the Ec cleAastical Commissioners; in all cases where the grossand net income have been both given, the grounds of difference between the gross and net income as shown by the arch bishops or bishops to be returned; such return to show the dates of all such inquiries, instructions, answers, and re turns, and to set forth, in a tabular form, the gross and nett incomes of each archbishop and bishop, as well as the charges and deductions which constituted the diff, r once between the gross and nett income; also a return of the sums paid to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for Eng. laud, in each year, since the Act to carry into effect the 4th Report of the Commissioners of Ecclesiastical Duties aad Revenues (3 and 4 Vic. c. 113), in respect of any prebend or other dignity in any cathedral or collegiate church in Wales, and of the amount of such sums as may have been appropriated by the Commissioners, and how appropriated.—Agreed to. ASSISTANT BARRISTERS BILL. Mr. SADLEIR asked the Secretary for Ireland when he intended to introduce the Assistant Barristers Bill? Sir W. SOMERVILLE—On an early day. THE NATIONAL GALLERY. Colonel RAWDON rose to ask the Noble Lord at the head of the Government whether the inquiry which was instituted respecting the state of the pictures in the Na tionalGallery,with a view to their better preservation, had terminated, and, if so, would the information be given to the House. Whether any proposal had been made by the Government to the Royal Academy, with a view of obtaining for the public collection of pictures, the entire of the National Gallery building; and, if so, what answer had been given. Whether any supplemental vote in the present estimates would be called for to carry out the proposition; and whether it is the intention of Government, before taking final steps for permanently locating the pictures on the present site, to institute an inquiry, by a Committee of this House or otherwise, in order to ascertain whether or not it is expedient to allocate the pictures in Trafalgar-square. Lord J. RUSSELL said, with respect to the first question as to the inquiry instituted into the state of the pictures, with the view to their better preservation, he had received a report from the gentlemen composing that committe, and they had made some suggestions as to their better preservation, but they requested to be allowed to make farther inquiry, particularly with respect to the mode of preserving the pictures on the continent. He should be ready, ere long, to lay that report upon the table of the House, although it was not a final report. With respect to the second question, in conformity with the opinion of the Com mittee of that House, which sat on the question of the building in Trafalgar-square, he made a proposal to the Royal Academy, with the view of having the entire building of the National Gallery devoted to the exhibition of the pictures. He had received an answer expressing their desire to comply with the wishes of the Government en that subject. With respect to the third and fourth questions he should say, with that additional information which he now had before him in regard to the present state of the pictures, he thought it was de sirable that some further inquiry should made before any vote was proposed to be sanctioned by the House, and therefore he proposed early next week to reeve fora Select Committee, consisting as far as possible of the members of the present Commission, to consider that further infor mation, and to state their opinion of the most desirable manner of preserving the pictures in the National Gal lery, and whether the present site was the most desir able far the institution.—(Hear, hear,) C ASTLEI3 AR UNION, Mr. P. SCROPE wished to ask the Secretary for Ire-,1 land whether any inquiry has been instituted by the Irish Poor-law Commissioners into the facts stated in the report of Dr. Ronayne, relative to the condition of the Castlebar workhouse, in the week ending the 20th April last ; and whether it appeared on the face of the report transmitted weekly to the Commisioiaers that so large a number were contained in the workhouse beyond that to which it was limited by their sealed order; and if so, what steps were thereupon taken by the Com m i s .. sioners? Sir WILLIAM SOMERVILLE said that Mr. Far rell, the union inspector, was investigating the subject, but he had not yet received his report. THE LORD CHANCELLOR. Mr. STUART, seeing the Noble Lord at the head of the Government in his place, wished to ask a question relative to the administration of justice in the highest court in the kingdom. It would be remembered the other evening the Noble Lord announced that the Lord Chancellor had resigned his office. Now most unexpectedly the public had learned that the Great Seal had been placed in Commission, the Commission consisting of two Learned Judges of the Court of Chancery, and one of the Learned Judges of the Common Law Courts. The Noble Lord was, per haps, aware that there was so much business in all the Chancery Courts that six days in the week were hardly sufficient to get through it. The arrangement which he had just mentioned would have the effect of shutting up two of the courts three or four days in the week, and he should therefore be glad to know how long the Seal was likely to remain in Commission? Lord JOHN RUSSELL was very sensitive of the inconvenience which resulted from placing the Great Seal in Commission, and particularly at the present time. At the same time Government had had to weigh the inconvenience that would have been caused by the Great Seal being entrusted to any individual before they had decided what course they would pursue with reference to separating the j u di c i a l from the political duties of the office, and until their course had been determined upon, he felt it to be his duty to advise her Majesty to put the Seal in Commis sion. He could assure the Hon. and Learned Gentle man that it was his earnest wish that the ISeal should continue 4 in Commission as short a time plana Fortnight p w e n s i s e i h b h l e e G , e s v h e a o r n u n d l m d t d e positionr m t i h n a e t d t o announce n ° p n n n,a o n n d d t hat May move for leave to bring in a Bill to carry it out. — ( He a r .) en bhe t e h in ad hae d p e e CUBA. - - Mr. DISRAELI wished to ask the Noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Department if he had received any official information that Cuba had been invaded by a buccaneering expedition from the United States? Lord PALMERSTON said it was well known that such an expedition had been in preparation for a con siderable time. He had been informed that an expedition had sailed from the southern part of the United States for the purpose of making an attack on Cuba. It left on the 6th of last month, and consisted of a force of 3,000 men; and it appeared that a further detachment, supposed to amount to 4,000 or 5,000, had followed some days afterwards. The President of the United States dis patched a force in search of that expedition for the purpose of intercepting it, and, in the event of it having landed, of taking such measures under the circumstances as might best show the friendly disposition of the United States to Spain. As her Majesty's Government had only received this information a few days ago, they of course had not yet been enabled to have any communication with the Government at Madrid, but the Spanish Minister who' reached this - country from Spain yesterday had been ' LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, informed of what had come to the knowledge of her Ma jesty's Government. SwiTzERLNND. Mr. 13. COCTIR,A.7 - :1 - : nr7 :. ‘ would put a question to the SeertAry of Foreign Affairs, respecting the affairs of Switzerland. THE CASTLE BAR UNION. Sir L. O'BRIEN said he had received information from the Earl of Lucan relative to the condition of the Castlebar Union, to which the Hon. Member for Stroud had referred a short time since, which showed that the information of the Hon. Gentleman was entirely erro neous. There was a second report which completely contradicted the statements made in Mr. Ronayne's re port. Mr. P. SCROPE explained that be was not aware of the second report, but he felt it his duty to call the at tention of the House to the statements made in the other report, as being discreditable to the union, if true. THE BISHOP OF LLANDAFF. Mr. HORSMAN gave notice that he would on Mon day put a question to the Noble Lord opposite relative to the University Commission. He found that a memo rial had been recently presented by the resident mem bers of the Senate of the University of Cambridge with respect to the Royal Commission which the First Lord of the Treasury had advised her Majesty to issue. He found the first signature appended to that memoria►, which attracted the more attention from the very ad mirable reply of the illustrious personage who was the Chancellor of that University—the first signature ap pended to that memorial was that of the Bishop of Llandaff. Se.eing that the memorial was signed by the resident members, he thought there must be some mistake, and that the Right Reverend Prelate was so engaged with the affairs of his diocese that he had not had time to read the memorial; but the fact was entirely the reverse. He found upon inquiry that last year, when he was appointed to the see, the Right Rev. Prelate was not resident; that he never had been resident, and that he was actually a resident of Cambridge University. Further, that the Bishop of Llandaff had never yet been a resident of Wales, and he knew not what reason could be given to justify this de parture from ecclesiastical usage, and this neglect of the duties of his diocese. The second question he intended to put was this—at the time the Right Rev. Prelate was appointed to the diocese, the Noble Lord had got credit for appointing a bishop who was acquainted with the Welsh language. Now he saw by a late paper that on a recent occasion, on the laying the foundation-stone of a church, the Right Rev. Prelate had been presented with an address, to which he had replied in English, stating that he was not able to answer them in Welsh. It appeared that he went through the form of reading a sermon in the Welsh language, but was unable to ad dress them in that language. He should ask the Noble Lord whether he had selected the Right Rev. Prelate for his acquaintance with the Welsh tongue, as it ap peared that some great deception had been practised upon the country and the Government. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said—Sir, I think the Hon. Gentleman might have taken the usual course of giving notice that he meant to ask a question relative to the Bishop of Llandaff, and have then made his statement — (Hear, hear)--or he might have taken another course, and, having given me notice privately that he meant to ask the same question, be might to•day have made an attack upon the conduct of the Bishop of Llandaff— (Hear, hear)—but to come forward to give a notice, and under that form to make an attack upon a Right Rev. Prelate, is, I cannot say, quite in accordance with the fairness the House was accustomed to observe.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I am certainly unable to answer all the Honourable Gentleman's particulars at present. All I can say is, that I have no objection to explain my motives for having recommended Dr. 011ivant to the Crown for the see of Llandaff. Having heard, in com mon with the rest of the world, that many complaints were made that the Welsh bishops were unacquainted with the Welsh language, when the see became vacant I made inquiries, not from one or two persons, but from many, whom I thought likely to inform me, whether they were acquainted with a person of eminent learn ing, and those qualifications which we should expect from a person holding the office of a bishop, and who combined with those qualifications a knowledge of the Welsh language. I considered that I was fortunate in the result, because I found that Dr. 011ivant had been at the head of a college in Wales for several years, and, as principal of the college, had given entire satisfaction to the inhabitants; he likewise acted as parish priest in a benefice in that diocese, and in that way also had become acquainted with the Welsh lan guage, and the habits of the people; joining to this special fitness, eminent learning; and on inquiring of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Winchester who had known him, the latter more especially, when he resided in Wales, I received from them the highest tes timonials in favour of Dr, 011ivant.—(Hear, hear.) But I heard from them and from others what, in fairness, they were bound to acquaint me with, that Dr. 011ivant never held the political opinions to which I am attached. —(Hear; hear.) I considered that if he possessed those eminent qualifications it would be becoming in me to waive any question of political opinions, and I, there fore, recommended him.—(Loud cheering.) I had never seen Dr. 011ivant before, and I have not had much com munioation with him since; and, indeed, all the commu nications I have had have been on the subject of obtain ing a residence for him in his diocese, so as to fix him permanently in Wales, There may have been some difficulties, with which I am unacquainted, and that perhaps I shall be able to answer more fully on Thurs day than at the present moment. At the same time I have no reason to doubt that it is the Rigbt Reverend Prelate's intention to reside permanently in his diocese; and I have every hope that all the expectations I enter tained when I recommended him to the Crown will be fulfilled.—(Cheers.) With respect to the answer the Hon. Gentleman has seen in the newspapers, I have seen it likewise. What I observed was, that after a sermon preached in the Welsh language, and having re veryiblebecause the address, he had replied in English, not being so well acquainted with the Welsh language as to make an impromptu address of Right atul e - on— Rev. Prelate is certainly not a native of Wales, and may ti.(H ear.) reply Th at to is a formal possible, s not be able to speak it with that ease and fluency which he considered necessarp on such an occasion. Notwith standing all the Hon. Gentleman has said, I have not the least reason to think that I have been deceived in the information that I have received, and I have no reason to repent of the advice I gave the Crown on be half of Dr. 011ivant, tr, appoint him to the see of Llan daff, and I have no doubt he will prove an ornament to the bench of bishops, and promote the spiritual advance ment of his diocese.—(Cheers.) Mr. WYNN, as a resident of the diocese of Llandaff, expressed his cordial thanks to the Noble Lord for the appointment he had made, and bore testimony to the eminent attainments and high character of the Bishop of Llandaff. Mr. HORSM.AN said he had said nothing about the character of the Bishop; he had merely called the atten tion of the Noble Lord to the statements he bad seen in the public papers, and would repeat his questions on Thursday. NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT. Mr. A. STAFFORD wished to know whether the question upon the new Houses of Parliament would come on that evening at a sufficiently early period to permit of a discussion taking pl ace ? Lord J. RUSSELL said there were so many clauses in the Metropolitan Interments Bill that he doubted whether they would be able to dispose of it early enough to bring on the discussion respecting the new Houses of Parliament. He should, therefore, fix it for the-first business on Monday next, and afterwards he proposed to take the Lord-Lieutenancy Bill. Mr. HUME hoped the Government would be on Monday prepared to state what they meant to do with , respect to controlling the expenditure of the new House. In reply to Sir R. PEEL, Lord J. RUSSELL said he should definitelq fix the discussion for Monday night to prevent disappointment, and be should then be prepared to state the views of the Government. SUNDAY LABOUR IN THE POST-OFFICE.I Mr. FORSTLR wished to know what the intentions of the Government were relative to the Post-office pies. tion? The vote obtained on the question had been mos t precipitate and incautiously come to, and he wished to know whether a full opportunity would be afforded the House of re-considering it? Lord J. RUSSELL would g ive an answer to the Hon. Gentleman's first question on Monday. He was not pre pared to fix any time for re -considering the question, and was not prepared to support any motion for the reversal , of the decision the House had come to.—(Hear, hear;) Mr. G. A. HAMILTON wished to know if the Noble Lord could fix any day for going i nto Su pp l y , as he had a 'motion with regard to education (Ireland), which many Hon. Gentlemen were anxious to have considered._ Lo rd J. RUSSELL had hoped to have brought on the supply that da but there was other business so p ressin g that he could not fix any day INTERMENTS. the next fortnight. . METROPOLITAN The House then went into Committee on the Metro politan Interments Bill, Mr. BERNAL in the chair. Clauses 24, 25, and 26 were agreed to without obser vation. On clause 27 being read, Lord D. STUART admitted that it was desirable that everything connected with funerals should be managed as moderately as possible; but ho questioned Whether it would not be better to leave the matter open to free com petition than to have the Government appoint persons to act as undertakers. The Bishop of London, in giving evidence before the Committee on this Bill, said that a - large portion of the emoluments of the clergymen was derived from the scarves, and fittings belonging to them, with which they we re presented at funerals . With that the undertaker s had nothing to do, as it was by the' re quest of the friends that these presents were made. He feared the present clause would ruin the trade, and place it in the hands of large contractors, destroying all cems petition, which was the only security for moderate charges. He suggested that theclause should be omitted altogether, and leave parties to make their contracts with these undertakers as they thought proper. He should take the sense of the Committee on the clause. Mr. Alderman. SIDNEY also recommended the omis sion of the clause, as, in his opinion, it would be quite inoperative. Funerals were now respectably performed for 31. 10s. Sir G. GREY said the object of the clause was to in vite tenders. The board would 'distribute its contracts as widely as possible, and he had no' doubt that parties would willingly undertake con tracts. The wish w as to distinish th e , expense of funerals as much as possible-- e sitainly at much lower rates than there were now charged. No man would be compelled to accept a con tract to conduct a funeral, and any person might employ any undertake: he chose without consulting the Board of Health. Mr. WYLD objected to the clause as ambiguonsly worded. The contractor might find it difficult to obtain Payment for the expenses incurred in the interment,of individuals. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL repeated the state-, meat of the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey). ,The JUNE 8: claw() was compulsory and permissive. It was permis sive for every person to go to a contractor if he chose; t, but t;oinp: to a contractor, thecontrtc•or wield bf , bound p ht.ti the bolo . [. Mr. BRIGHT complained of the attacks made upon unilerLkyrs for high prices. What would be said of architects, and lawyers, and medical men, fur charging high prices?—(Laughter.) The undertakers were not to be blamed for these expenses and high charges, but the folly of the public was to blame. Ho belonged to a sect on which the undertakers did not practise extortion. —(Laughter.) A great source of expense was the prac tice of the • poor going into mourning. Grief being symbolised by black, arose from the practice of bar barous nations.—(Laughter.) He feared the Bill would not put an end to expense arising from funerals. Mr. MACKINNON said, the whole of the argument of the Hon. Gentleman was, that there was a great deal of vanity in human nature, and that the sect of .the Hon. Gentleman was free from it.—(Laughter.) He thought that undertakers induced persons to go to great expense in funerals—expenses that were beyond their means— and which they would not have gone to but for the undertakers. They took advantage of the feeling of re spect for the departed relative. This Bill, he thought, would put an end to this system. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY saw no rea son why the lion. Member for Manchester should impute to vanity that respect for the dead which every other sect but that of the lion. Member for Manchester paid.—(Hear.) He had heard the straight dress of that sect imputed to vanity.—(Laughter.) He thought that when reverence for the dead ceased very little respect would be left for the living.—(Hear.) Sir H. VERNEY approved of the opinion expressed by the Hon. Member for Manchester. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE wished to know what was the calculation of the reduction in tke expenses of funerals? He wished to have the Noble Lord's scale of prices, as the Noble Lord was the undertaker of the Bill. — (Laughter.) Shillibeer undertook to bury a nobleman for 30 guineas, a gentleman for 101., and an artisan for 4/. He wanted to know if the Noble Lord could do it cheaper than that?—(Laughter.) The real object of this Bill was to knock up the undertakers of London. He did not know but Shillibeer was going to undertake them all. There were 700 undertakers—recognized undertakers, and with these there were cobblers, tailors, intermediate undertakers, who made the charges so high. If the Government were to bury the dead, let them do it openly. Mr. BRIGHT wished to know whether the number of contractors was to be restricted, or would it be open to all. Lord ASHLEY said there was no intention to restrict the number of contractors. They would select that number which they thought necessary. They might, in fact, form contracts with the whole body of undertakers, and he bad no doubt that they would do so with the whole body who had invested their capital in this busi ness. The evidence of Mr. John Bedford showed that instead of there being 760 undertakers, there were not, he thought, more than 100. There were 20 of the first class houses, or, as it was said by one witness, 30 or 40 at the most. It was quite true that a great deal of the extortion that was complained of was practised by the intermediate undertakers. It was not possible for him to state in figures what the reduction might be ; but he had no doubt but that it would be 25 or 30: per cent. under what had recently been put forward as low eharges. He expressed his hearty concurrence in the observation of the Hon. Member for Manchester, al though he could have wished they bad been made in a different spirit. There was much of idle pomp, the result of an idle custom ; but then there were moments when persons could not enter into bargains, they not liking to be charged with irreverence to the departed.— (Hear.) He hoped the evil custom would be abated by means of this Bill—that the prejudice would be , removed—that prejudice for the abolithin of which so much had been done by that great and illustrious woman who had now departed from amongst them, and who, in dying, had directed she should be interred with that simplicity and with—which she was sure to excite—that sympathy which became the member of a Christian community. Mr. WAKLEY proposed an amendment in the 42d line of the clause. He could say that, during the ten years he had been coroner, he had never heard a com plaint against the undertakers. The Noble Lord (Ash ley) had stated that undertakers were the persons to be employed under this clause, but there was no provision whatever in the clause to secure it. He (Mr. Wakley) would therefore move, with a view to effect that object, the, insertion of words giving power to the board from time to time to invite and receive tenders from " fur nishing ironmongers"—(Laughter)—he meant under takers of three years' standing in their business. Sir G. GREY opposed the motion, which, it' adopted, he said, would exclude all undertakers who had not been as much as three years in the business.—(Hear.) Mr. NEWDEGATE said that unless great precaution was exercised the system of contract might be grossly perverted and produce the very evils of which complaint was now made. He thought it would be best for the parish to make arrangements and contract for the in terment of its own poor. Then there 'would be a wide competition, and cheapness would more likely be secured. He disliked the system of classification which was adopted by the Bill. A great deal had been mid about the vanity displayed by persons in the conduct of their funerals; but would there not be as much vanity in having a funeral belonging to class 1, class 2, or class 3 ?—(Hear.) For his part it seemed to 'him that this classification would act as a premium on vanity, and he must say that he felt strong objections to the clause. Mr. COBDEN said it was not often that he rose to endorse an opinion of Mr. NewdPgate; but in the pre sent instance that Hon. Gentleman had anticipated him in the remarks he was about to make. He was of opi nion that the ostentation exhibited at funerals arose from this country being a country of castes, where every caste tried to emulate the caste above it.—(Hear, hear.) And the Honourable Gentleman was right when he said, whilst the aim of the Bill was to discou rage this system, by the classification of funerals they would encourage the very thing they professed to abate. What would bo the effect of this classification ? Everyone would be ashamed to have a deceased relative interred in the cheapest class, but would be desirous, if possible, to have him interred in the class above it. Where was the necessity of taking care of the higher classes at all? Surely they could bury their own dead. If the undertaker were interferred with, it could only be on the ground of benefiting the extremely poor. The higher classes could make their own bargain with the undertaker, and if cheated a little, it would not,ruin them. The middle class, too, could agree to terms with the undertaker. Why not, therefore, adopt a provision that the board should keep a register of a certain price at which funerals might be conducted with decency and solemnity for the lower and working classes. Sir B. HALL asked what fee the friends of an artisan would have to pay under the Bill? Lord ASHLEY-11. ss. That was the maximum. Sir B. HALL said, that arnongst the working daises that amount was considered to be.excessive. Could the Noble Lord tell, him what would be the whole expense from the time the contracting undertaker- came into a house to the time the earth was thrown upon the body in the cemetry, in the case.of a mechanic dying, say in the neighbourhood of St. Pancras Church, and removed to any cemetry the Noble Lord might choose to name? Lord ASHLEY replied that at present it was impos-. sible for him to give the required information; but his own opinion, and that of the board, foanded on the most minute inquiries, was, that they should be able to reduce the existing charges very considerably. Whilst on his might be permitted to allude to the statement made by the Hon. Baronet on a former night, to the effect that for interments in the burial-ground at St. John's-wood the charge was only 7s. 10d., 'including all fees and the cost of ground. He (Lord Ashley) had felt it to be his duty to make inquiry into thersabject, and he found that the Hon. Baronet had omitted alto gether the very heavy fee which waspaid' foi`the ground, called the churchwarden's' fee, and which amounted to' IL Bs.; thus making the total fees 1/..155. 6d.. Sir B HALL, in justification of himself, said that he had procured his intormation from the parish Offitiers with regard to what would be the charge for burials in the common ground, and that the particulars were as follows:—Rector. 4s. 4d.; clerk, 19. 4cl.;' sext - On, Is. 2d.; and the use of the-bell, Is. He had sines been informed, however, that there was a 'charge of 4s. paid to the parish, making the total 1 Is. l'Od., instead of 7s. 10d. The amendment of Mr. Wakley was then withdrawn.' Mr. Alderman SIDNEY thought the clause would be inoperative, and recommended that it should be struck in 1817 numbers of bodies were seen floating down the Ganges with vultures preying upon them; and that the Eastern birds of prey might suggest ideas regarding western. voracity.—(Hear, hear.) Judging from the violent language used out of doors he should not be astonished if her Majesty's Ministers were accused of delivering over for ever the carcases of her Majesty's subjects and the carcases of their posterity to the ra pacious clutches of an insatiate hierarchy.—(Hear, hear.) Language like that, and worse, was daily uttered against the Cnurch Establishment on the subject of the ob noxious clauses.—(Hear.) He entreated the Govern ment, if they had any regard lor religion, any desire to maintain feelings of regard towards the Establish ment, any wish to conciliate the affections of the com munity at large, and to retrieve the failing attachment of the Dissenters, to agree to the amendment which he had proposed.—(Hear.) Sir B. HALL suggested that the simplest plan would be to insert words, making the clause apply only to " the present" incumbents.—(Hear.) The question was whe ther those who came after the present generation should be compelled to pay for the burial of their relatives to persons who did not perform any duty whatever.— (Hear, hear.) It was intended in the first instance to give compensationin perpetuity on an average of five years, and if the incomes should prove too large, the 31st clause empowered the Commissioners to reduce the pay ments. Now he would show the Committee that the in comes to be derived by the clergy would be at least 175 per cent. larger than were ever contemplated under the former Bill. He stated the other day that the Bill was redolent of Mr. Chadwick and the Btshop of London— (Laughter)—and he had no hesitation in declaring that the amendments now proposed for the consideration of the Committee had emanated from the - Bishop of Lon don and the clergy themselves, for the maintenance and increase of their incomes; in fact, it had been officially announced in one of the papers that the Bishop of Lon don had headed a deputation to the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey), and suggested those changes, The change proposed was, that there should be a fixed fee of 6s. 2d. on every death, instead of fixing the. average at five years. Sir G. GREY- Not 1, but on. every Kr. T. DUNCOMBE feared that there would be some : partiality exercised in entering into the contracts. • Lord ASHLEY assured the Hon. Gentleman that the feeling ,ot the. board was in favour of "distributing the • businees as widely as possible. Their great object would bo first to consult public feeling and convenience, and then so to arrange the contracts as :that there should be a fair remuneration to the contracting parties). Mr. SADLIER proposed to limit the operation of the clause to funerals the cost of which should not exceed at but the proposal was negatived without a division.' - ;Mr. BRIGHT moved the addition of the following. -proviso:—" Provided that in making contracts as afore said, the said board shall not be at liberty to withhold contracts from any persons carrying on the trade of un dertaker who shall be willing to contract as aforesaid for the performance of funerals at the same rate as the said board shall arrange for with ;any other. person carrying on the bnsinesa of undertaker, and contractingivith the said board under the provisions of this Act.'! His object was to prevent a precedence by which the Board of Health was to be allowed to give up to any particular number of undertakers the whole business of the burial of the dead in a population of two millions. The Bill would, in fact, extinguish the business of a large number of undertakers. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the amend ment sought to effect indirectly what hid been already rejected by the House, when proposed by the Hon. Meniber for Finsbury. If any undertaker could , come in under the contract, and propose for the burial, there would be no contract at all. The amendment was negatived without a division. On the question that the clause as amended stand part of the Bill, • . Lord.D. STUART objected to the clause altogether, as compelling the poor, who would wish to bury their deceased relatives at their own expense by maps of 'payments by instalments to tie . undertaker, to avail themselves of a parish or pauper ,uneral. The Committee divided, when there appeared— For the clause •104 Against it ... ... 25 The clause was agreed to. - • On clans@ 28, enacting that the board may provide for the removal, at the request of relatives, ,of bodies to houses of reception, • , Mr. STANFORD propoted a proviso that no power of entrance to a roinn or a house should he given to the . officers; under the Act 9 1111nt 44914.41 of. the:relatives of nib decoased: j. at ~. —2 o 1 on every 6 burial in consecrated ground. - . Sir B. HALL—Now what would be the effect of this *iteration? :If -the payment had been settled on the aver age of three or five years, the incomes would have been fixed, and'po increase Would have taken'plice, but under the new system ihe amount would increase with the in crease of the population.—(Hean - hear.) He wo u ld t a k e the case of - the Parishes of Marylebone . and SL Pancras, comprising one-sixth of the population of the metropolis, -and Which were assessed on a rental of nearly 2,000,0001. In 1801" th - popnlation of Marylebone was 64,000, and in 1841 it was 138,000, slowing an increase of 74,000. .The, population of St. Pancras in 1800 amounted to 31,179, and in 184 1 to 149,208, showing an increase of 118,029. The inc rease in the two parishes.was•l92;o29, being at the rite of 200 per cent. It was 'quite evident that the amount of fees must increase with the increase of the population. Let, the. Committee just mark the dif ference in the number of deaths within two years only in Marylebotie. In 1845 the number was 1,209, and in 1846 it was 3,472. , The fees in the former year, at the rate of 6s: 2d.-on each funeral, amounted -to 987 Z; and in the latter year to . I,o7ol.—showing an increase of 83/. The burials at SL John's Wood in 1823 amounted to 860, WhiCh, at -the rate. of 6s. -2d.,- would produci3 3881. 10a.. - .In 1846 the number was 2,163, which, at the same rate, would produce 666/. 19s. 4d,; making a difference of 278/. 9s. 4d. The clergy were entirely -to blame for the disgraceful • state of the churchyards of the metropolis, which they had :.crowded for the sake of the' fees. Helnew of no instance of it clergy man-taking • any steps, - ,by representations to •Ilielpaiii chial authorities, -to provide additional ;places of huter ment, though there - were several eases in which the!y had opposed establishing extra burial places. The Hon. Ba ronet referred to the blue-hook, and quoted two 'o rl three_ extracts to'show the-state of some of the Churchyards, and the - disguating scenes _that had occurred. -It !Wes a mistake tesuppose that sueh-things would secure respect to the clergy, or that the community would constr to be taxed in perpetuity for the sake of men who Quid not perform their duty.—(Hear.) ! Mr.- ITEWDEGATE said the Hen. Baron 4 the MeMber. for Marylebone and the Hon. Member for- Westminster had made a tevere attack on .the clergy,, and' the former Hon, Member had read some . disgnstmg details of what had taken place in some of the church yards of the metropolis.---(Hear.) Wh'en the Hon. Member laid the" blame of the crowded state of the churehyards . to the clergy, le ought to- have recollected that they were not so much in - fault as the'inhabitants themselves ‘ and those who 'represented* them, Whose . duty it was to have moved in t,he Matter,. and atteMpted to remedy the abuse.—(l.lear.) The Hon." Baena' ought also to have recollected that the' fees " Were; I l t:mly the means of paying the clergy, and when he'compiained that the *fees would increase as the population in .creased, he ought not to have forgotten that as the po pulation ineresselthd duties 'of the clergy would also increase. —(Hear.) It seemed.to him that theelause wan a proper provision far-. the - future spiritual - duties; d' tlie' Church, .. The attack - of the Hon. Baronet' on the clergy was for a state of things which they could not remedy,_-- -- (Oh, oh.); - Was that the,case - ? •-: - ~ - - -L 1 ' Sir B. HALL, said, if they had made represehtations to the,parochial authorities that the burial-greunds Were insufficient, the evils might have. been remedied.'. But nothing of that kind had been done, . , I , Mr. NEWPEG.A.TE said he was not so soave cant with the position of the London clergy in this respeet as he .was with the clergy in :some 'other townS. In '.Bir mingham there were cures of souls-where the remuriera ' tion did not exceed 150 L, more than half of' which small stipend depended on burial fees. It ; was not. correct to -say that these payinenta were for the act of burial; they' were a part of the stipend, -. Objection might be made to the form otpayment, but unless other means were'pro videdrthe &prising the clergy of them would` be si 4 iply robbing them of a part of their income. —(Hear.) 1 Ike: thought the Hon. Baronet had not ,, scrupled to perlyert the circumstances for the sake of making an unfair atitack .on the clergy.—(Hear.) • ' Mr. HUME supported the amendment. The question was; were these burial fees - a . vested , right 'or th 4? It had, he th oug ht, been demonstrated that the c ler g y had no legal right to them.-- , (Hear.) It had been laid down as a rule by Committee© of that'll-map 'that compepaa lion was to. be given only as long:at all dutiesnceased, but that sinecures were DO longer to be.maintained. . He would be in favour of granting compensation to in cumbents' as long as they lived, but not to' their inoces sors. He concluded by ,saying he would supper( the amendment. . - . ....., , Sir DE. LACY EVANS said -on a fortnerocOasion Wheira-measure like that-had !leleD introduced, .46, hid difficulty had been the compensation of the elergy4 , H . : Government bad then said it could-not , be ex'pecteci hat. l t it was to be paid out of the Consolidated u o i f ld tit . 0 , eit.tgiyt could net be denied thisc lt.w.n.q he which silw,iy si stood in the way of these reforms. Could ' 'it be supposed for a moment thatlf the bishops had taken up that question long ago the evil would have Sir G. GREY said it was not intended to give a corn- been retrieved long since?—(Hear.) He did not th ie v ic f pulsory porter of entrance. `there was anything unreaEonable in the propesitiol!elt, The eteerelesee v-ith'1 ,, ,v , 31, eleeoe h; He . n ez o,,rs b'yne, (4 . sgie.-d tninstei. prf.seat calm', he mought-would ' l % ho On clause 29, referring t o th e sa l a ries of the additional tremely unpopular, and h e h o p e d it would not members of the b,urd and the officers under the Act, agreed to. in answer to Mr. HUME, Lord ASHLEY trusted he would be allowed to ° Vs: Sir G. GREY e x pl a i ne d th a t, accor di ng to clause 69, few words in vindication of th e clergy. The result 01.".„ there would b e annua l re p or t s an d a b stracts o f acc ou n ts experience during the timo the cholera had been Ta r o : submitted to P ar li ament . Th ere was no o bj ect i on to enabled him to say that wh e n th e y had been called :he naming the salaries of the additional members of the to deal in a summary way with many clergyme n d b a d board and of the offi cers i n th e Bill. had small burial-grounds i n con fi ne d places. an be i In answer to Mr. T. DUNCOM BE, asked them to close up their grave-yards. 'tile), Sir G. GREY said th ere was no c l ause i n th e Bill h a d consented to do so with ou t a mur mur, and we , to authorise me m ber s o f th e b oar d t o h ave a sea t i n h a d n e v e r received compe nsa ti on f or it then a to Parliament. The compensation now proposed was Inuc h thre e The clause was amended by the insertion of the words than that which had ben proposed under the a d " hereinafter mentioned" after the word " salaries," so as years' average. On 52,000 interments the sum Prq:b e d to accord with the a dmi ss i on o f th e Ri g h t H on . B arone t was a b ou t 16,0001, and that was s till f ur ther dicier; iv (Sir G. Grey), and w a s then agreed to, by about 3.0301. paid to officiating clergymen' es Sir G. GREY gave notice of an amendment on this as he understood the sense of the House, there ; t " in - ic ire and the 38th clause, t o mee t th e case o f th e b ur i a l o f strong op p os iti on t o g i v i ng com p ensat i on to e%J f tel paupers who might not b e o f th e E s t a bli s h e d Ch urc h, a nd cum b en t s . B u t it s h ou ld h e remem b e red that,: ail at whose burial ther e m i g ht b e no p erson t o p er f orm th e t oo k awa y one p art i cu l ar d u ty t h e y did not to‘t e leal burial service, unless th ere was a f ee a ll owe d. H e s h ou ld man y th a t were necessar ily p er f orme d by those wu therefore propose to insert in line 15, after " 6s. 2d.," various other parochial clerical offices to discharge' 0 0 the word " one shilling." He also gave notice of an Mr. HUME wished to know how the law of the amendment, to prevent the payment of a fee for the re• stood. moval of a body. • The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said no ClaiM f th fees , On clause 30, referring to compensation to incumbents, could be enforced by law for duties performed bi ; co . o ofl Sir B. HALL asked what was the cause of the differ- but custom gave a right where the duty Was Pe r . vi d s ;) ence between the clause in the original Bill and that in by the parties themselves.—(Cries of " Divide, di e d.. , the present? The former gave compensation on an aye- The Committee then divided, when there Or e° rage of three years' income of the incumbent ; the pre- For the amendment ... ..• 18 s 26 sent proposition was, th a t a f ee o f 6 s . 2d. b e p a id cn A ga i ns t it every burial. Majority ~„ to re' Sir G. GREY said the change w a s adopted as the Sir B. HALL objected to allow the burial feei.eet best mode of awarding comp ensat i on , after he had re- main at 6s. 2d. as fixed by the Bill. The ineulnu o d to ceived various communications on the subject, which St. Pancras had only 2s. 6d., and they now Im .° P ° v re' was surrounded with many difficulties. A great per- give him 6s. 2d., or 175 per cent. more than ba ll , e _stel tion of the incomes of metrop o li tan c l erg y men was d e c ei v ed . I n M ar yl e b one t h e p resent f ea was 4 3 . *7 O O rived from burial fees, and he must say he always found they proposed to make an addition to that of 45 pet the clergy ready to make a concession of their interests for doing nothing. They ought in common faire sr' for the public good. Th e com p ensa ti on t h e y wou ld a ll ow t h ese l arge p ar i s h es to en j oy t h e i r present he fed receive under the proposed clause would be much less tageous position, and if in the smaller parishes t +e die t than that under the form e r one; th e p r i nc ipl e now were too h eav y, t h e y oug h t t o b e b roug ht down " be re' adopted was identical with that adopted in all the come- sum or even less. He moved that the amount, by the tery Acts, though the amo un t was muc h l ess . A ccor di ng d uce d from 6s. 2d. to 4s. 4d„ the sum receive d to an extensive average that had been taken, the amount minister in the largest parish in the metropolis• of the fee would be Bs., but 6s. 2d., which was th e ave • Si r G. GREY sa id h e was informed that 40. ..t e sop rage of a less number, was the amount th a t h a d b een th e l owest f ee rece i ve d i n t h at par i sh, an d that I ' A fixed upon, and with which the great body of th e c l erg y rage f ee f or t h e l ast fi ve years ha d been 6s. 91 would be satisfied. Besides, the payment of the chap- Sir B. HALL said that 4s. 4d. was the stun ' fie " c ap d lain for the performance of these d u ti e s w a s t o b e d e - , an a b out 70 per cent. o f t h e b ur i a l s i n M ar yleu °— • P. ducted from the fees. 2 s . 6d. t h e amount rece i ve d f or t h e same propos e Mr. LUSHINGTON moved as an amendment that St. Pancras. s pYt the compensation should not be perpetual, but limited Mr. HUME thought an average ought t 0 be 001 to such of the incumbents and others as s h ou ld b e i n an d h e h a d no o bj ect i on t o g i ve th e p rese nt ltla u r stla" actual possession of their respecti ve t enures a t th e f u ll com p ensa ti on; b u t h e did o bj ec t t o pay P e ' period of the passing of the Act. H e con t en d e d th a t th e annu ity t o th ose w h o were t o d o no duty. the gee clergy had no right to fees, ex ce pt w h en th e y ac t ua lly Si r W. JOLLIFFE wou ld go f art h er than ," 00 0 performed themselves the b ur i a l serv i ce . Th e on l y M em b er . H e was rea d y to compensate n ot 0 01 Y right they had in the matter depended upon custom isting, but the future incumbent. • el t" t only, and not upon law. The compensation clause had Mr. BRIGHT recommended the postpone been altered in various ways so as to diminish the corn- clause, so that Government having heard the ol o gi pensation, but the principle remained the same. The urged against it, might have an opportunity of °l e e el alterations had been framed on the practices followed more consistent with the claims of the publio,_,a t i a o ° with respect to the cemetery companies. In such cases justice between the clergy and the great popw a the bishop refused to consecrate until certain fees were this metropolis. guaranteed to the incumbent for the time being andin per- After some further discussion, stoner o r petuity. At Kensal-g reen th e payment was fi xe d at s s . 6 d. Si r B. HALL as k e d if t h e Ri g h t Hon. Aga' • if for a vault, and 2s. 6d. f or t h e open groun d . Th e bi s h op ten d e d to act on t h e suggest i on o f the Hon. Dle";gadl4 afterwards found, wh en o th er cemeter i es were esta - M anc h ester; b ecause , if so, h e was w illi n g to W 1 blished, that he had made a bad bargain, and the fee his amendment. ft° ° ;se from at the Western C emetery was fi xe d at 10s., an d at tae Si r G. GREY sa id no goo d result cou ld ar- South Metropolitan a t 20 5 . ; an d if t h e G a ll ant M em b er postponement , an d h e t h ere f ore mus t d e cline t ° near him (Captain Pcchell) should die at Brighton, he that course. aclf' lari e could not be bu r ied th ere f or l ess t h an a f ee of 2 1 . 2 s .— Si r B. HALL was a b out to w i t hd raw his ta le e (Hear.) The b e st excuse f or com p ensat i on to t h e c l ergy b ut was i n f orme d h e cou ld not d o so without be was that in many i n sta nc e s th e y were supporte d a l most o f t h e C omm i ttee . {the cl" ti altogether by buri a l f ees . A g r ea t d ea l o f di ssat i s f act i on M r . HUME, w i t h t h e v i ew o f gett i ng r id 0- tin ref was felt towards the Established Church, and that dis- culty, begged leave to move that the Chair ° satisfaction was expressed in no measured manner. It progress. had been stated that after the cholera broke out in India The Committee divided, when there anneal. 5$ For the motion .. , 4 5 ' Against it ; Majority of , Mr. Alderman SIDNEY said, a;ihe question 11 ; pol l in . his opinion, been duly consider e d, he W o ill e that the Chairman do now leave the chair. r oe . ; Lord J. RUSSELL would not object to the 001(' but proposed that the House shodld meet f/t oclock on Monday, to proceed with the Bill. , Mr. HUME protested against their meet e• P o o'clock on Monday.—(Loud cries of " Hear, ei4r 00 1 : 0 had to attend a Committee of great importsoce'md I" had many other Hon. Members; and he 11° Y - Noble Lord would not petseve in that propositionloool Lord J. RUSSELL complained of the leng b e 0 ; discussions that had taken place on every' ce:o;s ib unless they had morning sittings, it would be '.„7,iolt i 's to carry the Bill through during the present o ,T b rin 49 Sir B. HALL said it the Government wwo ld `c sli ° " e ; Bills like the present, they must expect to find,, i t- iso, o , whose interests were so deeply involved 5 120 0 ' 4 prei n n their representatives to resist what they th°" m a tieg: v g dtcial. He should feel bound to oppose the , 113 ,, e 0 e 0t A IP e l Monday at twelve o'clock, as he had to atteno g e e of his constituents on that very subject e n 0 , W a g morning. Lord J. RUSSELL said he did not insist 0 31, 11 8 to day any more than Tuesday, and if it We n r a. clot e r. convenient, he should fix twelve o'clock on .11/i n ts Mr. C. LUSHINGTON said his constittleithvol completely dissatisfied with the precipitation /- f r this Bill was hurried o n .—(Oh, an d a l au gh.) nsie e 'sl After some further dis cuss i on , th e further, c."-nesl Lion of the Bill was postpo ne d till Tueea l)l twelve o'clock. The House then resumed, an d the CHAI R ; porte progress. On d the question that the Bill be further c. ,0-1 , . 130 i twelve o'clock on Tuesday. .• sit° Mr. BOUVERIE said he objected to their • twelve o'clock. cV • The House then divided, when there aPPe 6-e 6 • . For the motion "' 155 Against it ". 1 1- 0 0 itivn itel..o Majority in favour of the mot., The Yudges of ' Assize Bill went through ts ; bert t isoctio Mr. NEWDEGATE moved for leave Bill to remedy the state of the law with ra s p t o Pr ° 'dentson railways. The object of the Bill Wag medical assistance in case of accident. olf Leave was given to bring in ~the Bill, dig po s s, The other orders of the day we re then, dew" and the < House adjourned at a Quarter to v /1 " RAILWAY SAAR lt 4) • - BRISTOL, JUNE 7. e tiCe SrocK Exemsarc4B.--The market was verY, B oo -0 1 otec: with a considerable amount of business doing a' ea , of yesterday. The transactiOns-vrere—Great Weet,_ e ) 14 546 cx n.—Ditto, New 17/. Shares, a t u cest er Midlands, 36 1 A—Ditto (Birmingham and per Cents., 120. . LIVERPOOL, JUNE 7. ,1,111 .1 1 STOCK ExcrikNart--The s market was -- 1 fi e di prices lower. The transactions were as follot e ' o beo'l, l , and Yorkshire, Fifths, 9/ , 13s. 9d.dis.--B 1r ; 110517i l i p , cashire, and Cheshire ( 6 per-cent. till 18°I ' ) '107' 74 d ' l '44 and Bradford, 95—London and North-Westernla id, ee d ,9, ,) ,' New Quarters, 6s. 3d. dis.—Manchester, 5, 11 °1100, 1 11 4 1 'v colnshire, 17—Ditto, Preference, 7/, •Ifie- eu --Ditto,Halies, 261. 133.9 d. dis.—Ditto, ConSno,•cisterio, -16—South-Eastern and Dover ("go. 4), Ditto, Thirds, 5% 7 -York, Newcastle, and P" . E. Purchase), 6 per cent. till 1850, 743 dig* e t tcqSe BIRMINGHAM, enn " ng 01 111 1 ,14 SToes EXCIIANGE.—Business in this gist - of""i e r was very flat, and pri ces h a d a t en dency dc! . .10.0 13 transactions were as follow :—ShrewsburY W ' m 01' (B), 7 dis.—Shropshire Union, 41. Ss• 9d • / LEEDS, JUNE -7. dal ExotAxGz.— The transactions to-7-ii'), low :—NorthWesteni (guaranteed re gistrato sc y, , 4 Midland ( 501.), 26 dis.—Caledoriian. 91 6c f° o l eegl rADVIIRTISEMENiI —A re m arks..- `n e e ,..- re fulZ cured by Holloway' s Oi n t me nt and r l Pi. o set i l Mr. Ailiday, 209, Hi g h- street , Ch e ltenham , I ' d t he ' ll O 0t 3 , 1 0 1 ohlwas afflicted with scrofula in the neck, s t ell piel' o pi creased so fearfully that in foui year!, he had h bets ) r A' body besides a tumour between 'the 'cies'. being . ° oo e. $ 9 .A 3 treatment a ff orded him no relief; the blotl - the di° a Or that it was considered impossible to,subdus ro oric o ji c o o , this crisis Holloway's,Pills and Ointment Nor o e o so lli r ee with great success, for in tw o months the bet li st , th s os or o by their use, and he has con ti nue d well for thie 4 —Sold by all Druggists and at Professor PA , 0 0 of went, 244, Strand, London. yeni ng 'ill Szatocri ACCIDENT.-On SundaY,e /) Vies Charlesworth, of Chapelthorpe Hall, Was w ax, w h oe,. / :, 0 ' 1 , his fields, he was suddenly attacked by „ e t 'live d "' him n ,w o it n hg the o s a p t several of his ribs, and would in all Po`i i - deot , ate e r o c t lu b r u a t too k a he d g e-stsk° g ot , and beat the animal off'. The unfortunate g a e, woman who saw °t e fro o leti oa ties dangerously ill.-- Wakefield Journal. so,'ote i MAIMIBD. „ore , ia sr I ' On the 4th inst., at St. Peter's, Eaton hall, halli lowland Beaumont, Bart.,' of Cole Orton - 4 ill' , ll , 11 , 1 shire,. to Pauline Menzies, 1 ' 4 ° o' 13e1li, Esq., of the H.E.I.C.S. jun aver' S in is - On- the sth inst., at St. Geerge's:," --- ivicie ret •de yid Count Maggiolini, of Mombercelli, George's:, Be ideisigiote It limit, Captain of the Grenadier Guards, t° "—oar 1 1 to ‘,l el.de.st daughter of K. Harvey, Esq., of Th01.•P,%; esievc g cly, On the 4th inst, at the church of St. t,i'Mpipe,glol William Henry, second son of Anthony 1 L' 4 7 4. g igil l ' third' daughter v ,e, , It , the Lyndhurst-road, to Ruse Anne, Od es ' '- • 14 : .1 . 1 tde , of Camberwell"-grove. o tt 44 b a o °l I T .: b t ttt t ih t orougb, apred 4 e f At Bandolph--bousBe,'Maida-bill, on the ,6th 1115t. ' .41,0f 1F n e h l m th:nst., at WalliDnlggforp.d,Charles Athecerrpo,fil At,llol.lttlit stenslralng eaagisstsr..ate and lather of , thrie,w_:isr4,l: pp: court-road. , J3erl‘ 9 ' the "sth inst., Clianntry-house,l3o:' P' n CVO the sth Ina seed 50 William Char to 'of' Charlton,3l On the sth eaat tEhtlya-npdhiPc:FTQ°lbtoerro-,..1.°/11e85' t!:icot' of ,Mr. T. Barker, aged 36. of C "' Out hesth inst., the wife of T. Conies, f,"Scl't Hampstead, aged 3ti. al London: P ificep No. 12, t its e 1 ri —lBlittreand.ed;ritutebrii:s.,:d. Irrisimpu_o2o 01:111, Strand, in the Precinct of the SavoY• 10 bilddiewg. SaturdAy, Juno 8, Isso. 1850. To 1 and ri the grc street, oyd es Fort /altolel Want V nz 'Me ; blishetl ( attire WILLI We mai The; contain, Plate, it Well as amt Ele an ••• lviterebf • tinny -ft • Selling s • glren, at For p • LAwrehe the i usui '33lV,‘ _The ar lake -rind tn*Y bei E A. o RATES Eeiweeri The and train 4 3, 1 Asley to. l t,he magi tv ~` Gard , an 1 '49 TASU „ I lk! iblloartn .311.1 .44 A.R., tt Om ,Y a iln ", 4 t Ety4t v4rie ,18 .v i t;tra Tli It i t 4 ees an • CeUrse §ta''' lna Y {rt. at i t : l l Y s Ortici k Irticul 4 p Y t had, addiagto Mr It A ron Bal Fore kta th t ht e: p a r t Yule. `~~ }•~~ I ~.•.~k ~ ~ ;7 • 14 IS; gUrte tkfi lt 1111 t 7 follow )4, ►t I'-. .... tk it a4S tg ei-r 4,46 to it, A Tra lies dangerously ill.— Wakefield Journal. 1, • BIRTHS. - tfie . 400 . , p OF. A 5,,, ; 611, * On the 2d inst., at Cranley ,Itenteri, II: Sept.. . fl e ri' ib i a . Le eds , the p f B e "' On the '3a inst., at On the 3d inst.. at Henbury-house, it ife Charles J. Parke, Esq. m ,ll O OF A DAUGIIT O " - 0360r ' a, P On the sth inst., at Clifton-park , . the .Rev. Benjamin Winthrop - f o uc. - On the sth inst., at Holgate . G , 4 01 m , gen.t's-park, Mrs. F. L.- Slous. n i v oia" On the sth inst., at Edgba.ston, near 1:1 °S. of Milliam Baulms, •Esq.' On the 4th- inst., at Hydd-par-i—b -- t ip; 7 Arthur Kinnaird. . ~;ice 0 ' On the 3d inst., at Herefora , the ' o r? G. Elayter. - • tle es' Sir i•O t it, L TEN Ziich build itree Far ebtalt &gains ot Buc in the their 1 Mute ings, !Reim] Data s