The Sun. — London, England, 1851-05-20 00:00:00

GERMANY. Accounts have been received from Frankfort to the 16th. M. von Rochow, the Russian Envoy, was to leave that city on the evening of the 17th for Warsaw. No sitting of the Diet for other than formal business was expected for some days. No date bas been fixed for the dissolution of the Central Provisional Commission of the Bund, now practically superseded. The garrison of Frankfort has not been increased, nor had any troops been concentrated round it; but the several States had agreed to put two-fifths of the Federal military contingent on such a footing that it could be put in motion within eight days. BRITISH PROTESTANT CHAPEL AT FLORENCE. The following correspondence has taken place between the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and her Ma jesty's Minister at Florence, on the subject of certain charges brought by the Tuscan Government, to the effect that the British chapel at Florence has been con ducted with a view to making proselytes to Protestant worship:— THE HON P. C. CCARLETT TO VISCOUNT PALMERSTON. (Receivd January 28.) " Florence, January 20, 1851. "My Lord,—A charge has been brought against the British Protestant Church at Florence by the Tuscan Government, of having been in the practice of teaching Tuscan subjects the doctrines of the Protestant faith in the Italian language, and of adopting other practices specified, contrary to the ecclesiastical regulations and laws of Tuscany. " I have the honour to inclose a copy of a note re ceived on this subject from the Duke of Cas gn of my reply to th a t no t e , w hich last contains refuta tion and futa lion of those accusations on a been , grounded be I addressed to of which I also inclose, w hich has i tte l a copy me by the church vestry at Florence, by which your Lordship will be convinced that thereaton. has been no sort of foundation for making the accusation. Excellency, I have si since sending my reply t o by his Signor Landucel, that the explanation I have affo rded been informed both by him and_ d e d appears satisfactory, and that it is possible the Tuscan ( gov ernment may have been misinformed by their ow n authorities. " Your that Lordship will observe it is now the ens tom for the police to a ttend inside the Church on Sunday. " The Duke of Casighano stated to me in conversa tion, that or d e rs had come from the Prussian Mission at Rome to sanction the Tuscan Government in prohibit ing of the Swiss Church at Fl orence from pastor _ preac hing in Italian to Tuscan subjects who have for some time been accustomed to frequent that church, the practice in future, he said, would be forbidden.—l have, &C., (Signed) "P. CAMPBELL SCARLETT." "Florence, January 9, 1851. 46M. le Charg6 d'Affaires,—Ller Britannic Majesty's representative at Florence, applied to the Grand Ducal Government in 1838 for permission to open under his protection a private chapel for the purposes of Anglican worship. The Tuscan Government complied with the request of the Minister of England, on the condition, however, that this chapel should be wholly and exclu sively private, which was moreover the natural result of the public law of Tuscany, in which there exists a state religion protected by the State. " The Grand Ducal Government has now been in formed that in the Anglican chapel in the Via del Magill:), all those who desire to take part in the service are ireely admitted, and it is even known that the custom of pray ing and catechizing in the Italian language has been in troduced there. Many Catholics, Tuscan subjects, im bibe there principles and sentiments contrary to the dominant religion. and publicly propagate the same. "The Tuscan Govercment is deeply sensible of the duty of not tolerating such an abuse, and of opposing a state of thins which, combined with other effects made of the same character and with the like object, weuid infallibly lead to the weekening of the Catholic religion in Tuscany. " Accordingly. I deem it my duty to acquaint you, M. le Chargé d'Affaires, that if the abuse which I have pointed out to jou is continued, the Grand Ducal Go vernment is resolved to adopt all the measures which shall be necessary to prevent' Tuscan subjects from taking part in the religious ceremonies of the Anglican chapel.—Receive, &c., " LE Duc DE CASIGLIANO." THE HON. P. SCARLETT TO THE DUKE OF CASIGLIANO. Florence, 26, 1:151. " M.. Le Alinistre,—l have delayed until now to reply to your Excellency's note of January 9, relating to the charges brought by the Tuscan Government against the British Protestant Church at Florence, for supposed interference with the religion of the State, by the adoption of certain practices specified by your Ex cellency's communication to me, and alleged to have been sanctioned by that establishment. " I had the honour, in conversation, to observe to your Excellency, that I apprehended it would he found, on due investigation, that the accusations advanced were groundless and erroneous, and that the Tuscan Govern ment had been deceived and misled in this matter, to the prejudice of the British church in this city. "Ia this belief I was not mistaken, and I have much satisfaction in inclosing to your Excellency the accom panying statement, drawn up by the committee appointed for the management of the English Church, to whom I forwarded a copy of your Excellency's note. "In this statement, signed by the secretary of the committee, and addressed to me, every point in year Excellency's note has been answered se> iutim, either by a direct denial of the facts imputed, or by an explana tion which cannot but prove twiefactory to the Tuscan Government. " It appears from this dxutnont that wither prayers, preaching, or tco.ching iu the Lillian languaze h.s ever been resorted to, nor in any other language, with refer ence to Tuican subjects. That no Toscana hare either been invited to enter, or encouraged to frequent, the Pro testant church, excepting the police authorities sent there by the Tuscan Government; and I am further au thorised to state, that no Protestant books have ever been translated, printed, or eirculto ed among Tuscan subjects with the sanction of the church in question. "Such being the state of the case, I trust your Ex cellency and the Tuscan Government will entertain the same conviction as I do myself, that the charges which have been brought against the English Church have no real foundation, and must have been caused by some Confusion and misunderstanding of the truth, as I feel convinced that it is, and always has been, the sincere desire of that religions institution to conform entirely to the regulatio n requ i re d b y the T uscan Government, from which it has never deviated.—l seize this occasion, &c. (Signed) "P. CAMPBELL SCARLETT." The sel ect vestry of the church have given a d.stinct denial, seriatim, of the allegations contained in the letter of the Tuscan Nlinister for Foreign Alfirs. They state that - no . custom has b een i ntroduced of making prayers or reading catechisms in the Italian language, and that no language had been used i n t h e church 'ministrations nave the English. 'VISCOUNT PALMERSTON TO THE RIOT HON. R. L. SHELL. " Foreign-office, Feb. 3, 1851 " Sir—l have received Mr. Scarlett's dispatch of the 20th ult., enclosing copies of a correspondence with the Duke of Casigliano, respecting an unfounded accusation brought by the Tuscan Government against the parties concerned in the management of the affairs of the British chapel at Florence ; that they conducted the services in that chapel in a way calculated to alienate the minds of Tuscan subjects from the Roman Catholic faith. " I have to instruct you to say to the Duke of Casig liano, that her Majesty's Government trust that this correspondence will show the Tuscan Government that they ought not to place too implicit reliance on the secret information which may reach them; and you will a l so say, that though t h e p a p e rs inclosed her 1 :. 1 E. Scarlett's dispatch are satisfactory to _.,. majesty' s G overnment , as s ho w ing that the •uritish residents at Florence hove strictly com plied with the conditions on which permission was g iven for the establishment of a Protestant chapel, yet hi m m a . In! impressil pirito e i s i ty s Government cannot disguise the pain lerant a which they have received from the into s comt ztli t. is manifested in the Duke of Casig liano contrast With the iand which affords so remarkable a prevails in the liberal unitd and enlightened system which cise of religious belief.--... Kingdom, in regard to the exer of Cssigliano.—l am, &c. patch to the Duke You will give a copy of this dis (Signed) ~....—_____ " PALMERSTON." EVENING. DANGEROUS A' ----- Efid POLLOCK L AsT I C I N THE REV. MR. attack was made in St. Last evening a remarkabl e • Mark's Church, en the Rev, ru ilhek, under the fol audetnocement of lowing circumstances i—On the cor n vice two men entered the church the ser xpiration apparently hour the service proceeded quietly, b ut t) 9. l ' seats. For an of that time the annoyingly in uestion bseathe restless. and. wandered hP and the clerk, in order to pr eserve th e aisle. Mr. Boyd, i ecorum, ordered them either t o sit down q uietl y o r church. Instantly, one of the men rushed to the the and, opening the door , with a stick in his hand, struc k Mr. Pollock twice on the b ack. Mr. Pollock, bu."ob' ob serving the man ascending the pulpit stairs, in quired who. he was. The prisoner exclaimed, with violen ce , that he was " God Almighty." Great e xcitement instantly pervaded th e 'edifice. Gentle menrose to their feet and ladies screa med, and seldom, perhaps, has a scene so remarkable been witnessed in any en eo ur tfLcedevoted to sacred purposes. Mr. Pollock, of re ceived ogi instant assistance from the gentle men and violent strti:'-1a,15 of the congregation, a nd, after a from the pulpit the madman was carried forcibl y Pollock buikling, u r. e i la, (I conveyed to the exterior of the perfect calmn ess resuming his sermon with shortly arrived, and t t composure. A, police-officer to the station was pinioned and con ducted in custody by a large concourse o f 8 st ation in High-street, followed r tators from the congregations of S. Mark's and Great r' l3 - ec at both owe , h aving te ; :t e l o g a e4reet Chapel, the services v.ng at the station shortly after the occur rence. 0u arri i toreme.asures of strong re wacescirain the prisoner from pressiou were found necessary round his wrists and violence, and handcuffs ware ropes round his feet. Subsequent! Mr. Talbot, from li th a e t ri p ts ip i e n n: alri Y yt --; 7. 77ig ri ti r d ib r b h o e n . p a r n i d . had a7, be traced elapsed the the act of violeace a zo "u ' Pected, it :after some time narae Daniel 'ad that his at 123, Grafton-street: reycii to the Dispensary. l iall er . . cquaint his NV,ifia with his position, ,e movements Nft;Fp at least of a , o ' v.-. 'e his name, but it Os not thought ira. We are bappy. to state that was not in any manner injuzed,— sterday. --- Mr. A4a Whitney, of New York, /Slid 5.1 r. U. D. A. rohi. bard, had an interview with-lAirci Pahnia3tou, ou Satur day, at the Foreign-offieei - sou - d although NGiii: ... coot at i ..,., , -‘ lr.'" A .3 1 if: t " tra „."' 4 1 .. tr.t4 Z 4 .: i ' Of V " . 4 , ... ,••• 7 a.. gig no. - 0 1. 10 ' IU * , , i Y( :.11. • ' 1 1. , , ,„•,,, elk:gt7 . • , 4....._ ',' THE sum LONDON, TUESDAY y EvIENING , MAY 20, 1851. ELECTION COMMITTEE. HARWICH. The Committee sat again yesterday , and . proceeded with the objections on the part of the sitting Member to the votes polled by Mr. Cranford. On the conclusion of the scrutiny the room was cleared, and on the parties being admitted, The CHAIRMAN announced that the Committee had determined that Mr. Prinsep, not being duly q ualified in accordance with the provisions of the Ist and 2d Vic.. cap. 48, entitled " An Act to amend the Laws relating to the qualification of Members to serve in Parliament," was not duly elected for the bo r o ug h o f Harwich to serveve in the present Parliament, and that the last election was therefore a void election. LIFE IN CALIFORN • We have been favoured with the following letter from a young Englishman, who has lately visited IA " San Francisco, California, March 14. It is now nearly a month since I arrived in San Francisco. During that time I have been busily em ployed,timeandlabour that • mines in California. After t he it ployed, visiting all the different and most important had cost me to reach this country, I fully expected that nothing could repay me ; but I am agreeably surprised, and consider that I am now amply re warded for all my troubles. Even as a commonplace traveller, I find in California a wide field of interest. Th e strange conglomeration of society; the practi ca l system of self-go vernment; constitution, framed not so muc h results ul p ts ec o u f lia an rit e le x s pe o r f im a experimental on the models of others as from individual causes and local necessities, are things which no other part of the world affords such perfect specimens of as California. Political economists and funded proprietors speculate on its immediate influences; while philosophers, on the other hand, prognosticating its ultimate destiny, look upon this country as the means of advancing civilisation and propagating Christianity from the eastern to the western shores of the Pacific. Without, however, indulging in a n y suc h l ucu b rat i ons , with which I have but small concern, I content myself with the ordinary avocation ofgratifying an d curiosity of being amused. On entering the bay of San Francisco, the first object that strikes one is the enormous mass of shipping. Lon don and Liverpool are of course beyond comparison, but with the exception of these, and perhaps New York I know of no other port which contains so great a number of vessels. The town itself is equally remarkable. When one reflects that eighteen months ago a few scat tered tents were the only habitations in the place, one looks with amazement on the city, which is daily in creasing, and which already numbers over 30,000 in habitonts. The site of the town is a steep sandy hill, but Yankee ingenuity is rapidly removing this inconvenience by levelling the hill and filling up the bay. The greater number of the buildings are upon piers stretching into the sea, and a lot of some 40 feet square of " water surface" is worth about 5,000 dolls. In the very centre of the town are several large ships, dis masted and roofed over. Their strange looking broad sides are decorated with the signs of different shops; and as they form a portion of the regular street, one wonders, at first, what eccentric characters have taken the trouble to paint their houses with two black stories and a white one in the middle. Air, ady there are several theatres, a French vaudeville, and one Italian Opera! And notwithstanding the strong national propensity of the people for business, one of the principal features of San Francisco, and indeed of every town in California, is the gambling houses. They are never closed and they are always full. It would be difficult to give you a correct idea of these infernal re gions, or to describe the strange scenes which daily take piece in them. Picture to yourself enormous rooms, gaudily decoiated, filled with some 400 or 500 people of all clas s es, without distinction of age, rank, or sex. " Mon' 6," " Faro," " Rouge et Noir," are the favourites among an endless variety of games. The tables are co vered wish money, surmounted with ornamental lump s of gold and bags of dust. At ono end of the room is, of course, a bar; at the other is a band. The excitement of the play, the effects of the liquor, the influence of the music, and, above all, the confusion of languages is, as you may imagine, what the Yankees call " some." Everybody is armed, from the ruffian who transfers his treasures from the mines to the gambler's table to the frail fair one who elieves the gambler's pocket for the benefit of her own. Four times since I have been here—l wonder that it has happened no oftener—differences of opinion, concerning, no doubt, points of honour, have been summarily dis cussed and as summarily decided in these places by vir tue of a " five-shooter." Three times out of the four the survivors experienced the pleasures of that prompt decision which they had so warmly advocated. In less than six hours after the quarrels the law of Judge Lynch bad done its work and order was again restored. Such is life in a new country. Leaving San Francisco, I took my passage in a steamer to the city of Sacramento, a large town, about 150 miles up the river, which bears the same name and situated at the extreme point of inland navigation. A day or two at this place sufficed to disgust me with a re petition of the scenes I had witnessed in San Francisco. Accordingly, by the first opportunity that offered I took my departure for Marysville, which, from its vicinity to the various branches of the Sacramento river, is the grand depot for all the miners of the wet " diggins " in ,Northern California, and consequently a __point of interest to a sightseer. After %pendiag a pleasant even ing with the editor of the Mar y snit e Herald—who by ttnebye happened to be a genuine cockney, serving the city of Mseesville in the several capacities of editor, play-actor, concert-giver, and auctioneer—l started the next morning for the " Forks of the Yubc." A :ew hours' ritlo along the Spurs of the Sierra Neveda brought me at last within sight of the goad hunters. Two or area hundred men were at work upon what had formerly bcea the bed of the river. By the law of mutual agreement each miner is en titled to a certain portion of this " bar," as it is called, in which the b old is found. And as the p rec i ous metal cannot in such diggings be separated from the soil without the process of washing, the allotments are mea sured by 30 feet on the bank of the river and so far back as the bed extends—thus giving to each man his fair allowance of water. Generally speaking the original possessors have long since made their fortunes and sold their claims to others for large or small sums, according to the richness of the soil. The result is that these claims are now falling into the hands of small compa nies of three or four, who, in their turn, will sell them, as immigration increases, to companies of six or eight, and so on. till the individual gains aro so small that the price of labour falls and the capitalists become the sole proprietors of the mines. Where three or four toge ther possess a " claim" each attends to his own de partment of the labour—one loosens the soil, another fills the barrow or cart, a third carries it to the river, and the fourth washes it in the " rocker." If the dust is very fine, quicksilver is afterwards used to co lect it from . the black sand. For the most part the mining is above ground—i. e., the depth of the soil is seldom more than six feet above the rock. In some place➢ they are what they call " coyote diggins ;" these produce tho same kind of dust, and are worked like coal mines, having shafts sometimes as deep as 60 feet. The average weight of gold raede by each miner throughout the " wet diggins," cr diggins where water is used for washing the geld, is nearly -lee, or 7 dolls. a day. To give you an instance, however, of the amount of metal in the soil, which I had from a miner on the spot:—Three Englishmen bought a " claim," 30 feet by 100 feet, for 1,400 dells. It had been twice before bought and sold for considerable sums, each party who sold it supposing it to be nearly exhausted. In three weeks the Englishmen paid their 1,400 dolls., and cleared 13 dolls. a day besides for their trouble. This " claim," which is not an unusually rich one, though perhaps it has been more successfully worked, has produced in 18 months over 20,000 dolls., or 5,000/. worth of gold. After all one had hoard of the dissipated habits and questionable characters of the miners, I was prepared to "rough it" during my visits to the mines, and when I found myself about to pass a night in a small tent designated the " miners' home,' in which over 40 of these gentlemen were assembled to drink, board, and lodge, I cannot say that I anticipated much plea sure in the prospect of sleeping four in a bed, or being at the " rude mercy" of a " crowd" of which I was the only one unarmed. But, strange to say, I never saw a more orderly congregation, or such good behaviour in such bad company; and the only thing that disturbed my peace was that one night the bunk in which I slept, not being sufficiently strong to support its unusual bur den, yawned in the middle, and deposited its contents on the ground. I returned to San Francisco, and thence I went to the " dry diggins" in the south. The country is hero truly beautiful, and, unlike the plains in the great valley of the Sacramento, is exceedingly fertile and capable of producing unlimited resources. Even in the present drought its valleys are watered by frequent rivu lets, while throughout the arid nature of the soil, com bined with the uncertainty of the seasons, will prevent that part of California ever becoming agricultural. Its mi ronlstatitu_ neral w ea lth i s , p er h a p s , th e greatest i n t h e wor ld. Th e qaartz rock, which is supposed to b o th e on ly permanent tou e fro m w hi c h go ld w ill eventua ll y b e d er i ve d , ex tends north and south for more th an a d egree an d a h a lf o f f d e ; and the quicksilv e r m i nes , now ren d er i ng o, uoolb. to 4,0001 n. o f meta l d a il y, t h reaten to de stroy the previous monopoly of the Rothschilds. At Ma riposa, in the district of the quartz, a society pos pease, machi a ner .. y elanns" sessing sev e r l have established, at a great ex men, whom they p for crushi ng th e roc k. Th ey emp l oy 30 month. This sooieaty at the me of 100 dollars each a ;al sets Y I ti a s now making a clear g a i n o f p l ~, , s c O t e o d dolls. whin a C d a a p y i work in the country. It is will show y ou w h at i s to b e ex pected of metal is to I n l t o lt f e clna yt i Z z rk at p resent, the gold may be difficult to say what the av7abgaet proportion part, to th e w p h r ic o h po i r s ti a o taking only the rich er represented by 15 or 20, end the quartz hv 10 about one-fitth metal; and it is ascertained 0, making that one iifceenth will pay. So much for statistica. I might enter more fully into detail, or I might enlarg e co .. nstuerably general views; but I think that you hare b a d on pretty nearly enough of the one, and II know that you are better able than lem to perform the rest for yourself. In the limited space of a letter it is difficult, where go much may he, said, to say what is interesting and to leave un said what is not interesting; and more particularly in writing to you it is no easy matter t o ma ke state ments which, however new to mo at people, you most u probably are already conversant with. The interest, I , owever, which must be felt concerning California, and the little that is at present known about it, must be my only apology for so great a trial on your patience. Imagine how anxious lam to bear some news, when I tell epu , my last letter from England is more than nine months 0 1. t ! I have relictpii.hed the idea of South UletieA, andproposeby the States instead. On the 1- 15th I leave this by steamer for Acapulco; from that point I shall ride through Mexico, and (D.V.) before tlee end of the summer I shall be again in Eng land. And you may be sure I shall not be sorry when I can exclaim with truth, " Jueundiacti labores." POLICE INTELLIGENCE. WESTMINSTER. A gentleman applied for a summons against an omni bus conductor for deceiving him with respect to the route of his carriage. The trick was one of a more than ordinarily disgrace ful character, the gentleman, who is evidently a stranger in London, having been taken a considerable distance in the omnibus in a direction diametrically opposite to his destination. The applicant hailed the omnibus in St. Paul's Churchyard, and inquired whether it went to the Colosseum, and upon the conductor informing him that he could put him down very near it the gentleman got in, and after riding some distance was set down at Chel sea Church, near Battersea-bridge, the conductor point ing to a turning and telling him to go up there. The gentleman did so, but after proceeding some distance, ascertained upon inquiry at a tradesman's shop that a gross deceit had been practised upon him, as he was at least three miles from the Colosseum. Having subse quently ascertained the conductor's number, he applied to the Lord Mayor, who referred him to this court. The clerk was about to take the gentleman's instruc tions for a summons in the usual way, but it having been previously held by Mr. Burrell that where the traveller is " deceived" at the time of getting into the carriage, and " undeceived" when he alights and discovers the disgraceful trick that has been practised upon him, he should apply for his remedy where he was imposed upon, he considered it his duty to call the gentleman's atten tion to the circumstance of the false representation having been made in St. Paul's-churchyard, which, ac cording to the above view, would be the place where the offence was committed, when Mr. Burrell expressed his opinion that, although the charge might be viewed as a continuing offence within his jurisdiction, the case was one especially within the Lord Mayor's district, and re ferred him back to his Lordship. The gentleman, who was actuated only by a desire to protect the public, expressed, as may naturally be sup posed, his concern at discovering there was so much dif ficulty in the matter. WORSHIP-STREET. Thomas Bates, a powerful blackguard-looking fellow, was brought up before Mralammill, charged with being concerned with several men not in custody in the follow ing brutal attack upon Mr. Josiah Mason, a tradesman in Goswell-street The complainant, accompanied by a friend, entered a public-house in the Kingsland-road to procure some re freshment, after a walk, on the preceding eveeing, and there saw the prisoner and four or five other men drink ing at the bar. Two young women also entered a few minutes afterwards, one of whom was showing her foot, which had been injured, to the other, when the pri soner's wife interfered with them and made use of some filthy expression, and upon the young woman expressing her resentment, she struck her such a violent blow in the face that her eye became swollen and black. The complainant reproved the prisoner's wife for such an un provoked and cruel attack, and was immediately set upon by the prisoner and his companions with such ferocity that the landlord was obliged to interfere for his protec tion, and the whole gang were ejected from the house. There they made such a disturbance and uttered such vindictive threats, that the complainant, his friend, and the two young women were afraid for a long time to leave the house, and were at length let secretly out at the pri vate door; but they had no sooner got into the street than they were discovered by the prisoner and the other men, the former of whom rushed upon the prosecutor and struck him down by a violent blow in the face, while his wife and the four other men beat and kicked him about the head and body as he lay upon the pavement in such a brutal and savage manner that, as one of the witnesses expressed it, "he was completely covered with blood, and appeared to be perfectly emaciated." Tne screams of the women, and cries,for the police from several of the neighbours, ultimately brought up several constables, who rescued the prosecutor from further in jury and took the prisoner into custody, but his com panions effected their escape. When called upon for his defence the prisoner said that he had been struck first by the complainant a blow onithe mouth which knocked out one of his teeth, but he acknowledged that ho had no witnesses to corrobo rate his statement; and this being positively contradicted by the complainant and another witness, who declared that if ho had sustained such. en injury he must have re ceived it in the course of his being ejected from the house by the landlord and his assistants to protect the plaintiff from his violence, Mr. HAMinILL, after commenting severely upon the prisoner's outrag eous and wanton conduct, ultimately consented, at th instance of the complainant, to adju dicate upon the case summarily, and sentenced the pri soner to pay the extreme penalty of 51., or, in default, to be committed to the House of Correction for two months. The prisoner was not able to pay the penalty, and he was therefore removed in the van. CLERKENWELL. Placid° Cornoti, an Italian, who was described in the police sheet as a picture-frame maker, of 3, Summer street, Clerkenwell, was charged with having violently assaulted and stabbed at police-constable Ward, N 0.141 G division; and Mary Slater and Mary Collins were also charged with having assaulted the officer and at tempted to rescue the prisoner. Ward, whose head was bound up and who was much injured, deposed that yesterday morning, at about two o'clock, he was on duty in Warner-street, Cold Bath fields, Clerkenwell, when his attention was attracted by a noise, and on proceeding to the spot he found the pri soners, who were hootiLg and disturbi ng th e w h o l e neighbourhood. Ho remonstrated with them, and urged there to go home quietly, when the min turned upon him and abused him. Witness took him into custody, on which the female prisoner rushed at him and at tempted to rescue the male prisoner. Police constables 214 and 270 G came to his assistance, and they suc ceeded in apprehending the prisoners. The male pri soner was exceedingly outrageous, and fought and kicked at witness and knocked him down. He then took a knife from his pocket, swore he would rip him open, and made a stab at witness, but mischief was prevented in consequence of the point of the blade coining in con tact with his belt, which was cut. Constable 244 G confirmed this evidence. When he saw the prisoner take the knife from his pocket, deli berately open it, and make a stab at Ward, he (witness) struck him on the arm with his staff, and he dropped the knife. 270 G gave corroborative testimony. The prisoners denied the charge. The male prisoner affected ignorance of the Erig language, until the woman Slater said she had known Mr. Cornoti for the last four years. She met him on Sunday night, when he asked her to have something to drink. Mrs. Collins and herself accompanied him to a public-house, where they drank together, and they were only anxious to get him home. Mr. COMBE—Did he invite you to drink in the Eng lish languag,? Prisoner—Yes, Sir, Mr. COMBE—Then he understands English? Prisoner —Oh dear, yes Sir, quite well.—(A laugh.) Mr. COMBE said it would have no good effect upon such a fellow as the prisoner to inflict a pecuniary fine. He would therefore sentence him to one month's impri sonment, without fine, in the 11 ,- ,use of Correction. The women were sentenced to pay a fine of 20s. Cornoti was tak.•n from the bar and locked up. SEABORNE MAILS. (X signifies that the mails are sent frore the General Post-office by the night—and M by the morning —dispatch.] When made up in From what When PLACES. General Post-office port die- due. London. i patched. America (by Brit. pkt.)N May 23 ....Liverpool.. May 27 America (by U.S. pkt.) NiMay 27 .. • • ,Liverpool May 22 America (by U.S. pkt.) Mlllay 21 .. Southampt. Africa (West coast) .. Nil4th of the month 'Plymo u th J une 3 Alexandria* • • ...... Nll9th & 30th of mo. l Dover .. May 18 Belgium .. .. •• Ni Daily . • I Dover .. Daily Brazil .. • .. M 9th of the month ;Southampt. June 12 Buenos Ayres • • .. M 9th of the month ISonthampt. June 12 California(viaChagres)M 17th of month Southampt. May 20 Cape of Good Hope N 14th of month ;Plymouth.. June 3 Constantinople* .. 17,7 th 17th 27th of mo , Dover .. May 20 Central America .. M2d & 17th of mon. Southampt. June 5 Channel Isles • • .. N Mon., Wed., & Fri. Southampt. Tn. Th. a Chili .. .• . 3117th of the month Southampt. May 20 France M &NiTwice daily ;Dover • • Tvrlcedaily Greece* .. • • NI 7th 17th 27th of mo 'Dover • • May 20 Hamburgh .• N.Tuesday & Friday London Tues. Sat. Holland .. • • .. MlWednes. & Satan ILonden Most.Tha Honduras Nll7th of the moath l Southampt. May 20 Ireland .. •• M & 31 - Twice daily .. —lllolyhead •• Twicedaily India(via Southamp.) M 20th of th e mon th,Southanapt. May 23 India (via Marseilles) N 7 th& 24th of month ;D over • • Arrived I Mediterranean (via Southampton) • • 341 20th of the monthlSonthampt. May 23 Mediterranean (via Marseilles) .. N 7th& 24th ofmonthlDover .. Arrived Mexico • .. 312 d of th e month.. I Southampt. I June Madeira .. • • .. M 9th of th e month ISouthampt. Malta* June ! 12 N 7t. 8 2,,tii ,19tia,27th,} 30th of month Dover May 20 Naples* .. • • • • 31,5 th 15th 25th of mo D over .. May 22 Papal States* .. Nlsth 15th 25th ofmo Dover .• May 22 P en i nsu l ar _ •.. 31 7th 17th 27th of mo, Southampt, 'May 24 Nsth 15th 25th ofmo Dover •• May 22 Peru „•• • • M l lith of the month i Southampt. Ma 20 1117th of the month ;Southampt. May 20 NestTnsa l ly: l .. West Indies (except Havanna & Nassau) 111 L 2d of the month .. Southampt. June 5 * The mails to those c French packet via Marsei CALIFORNIA.—MaiIs to are now despatched and d 2d of the month . ountries thus marl and from Callfornt Southampt. June 5 Led (*) are conveyed by We by every Ameri; [a, via the 'United State [can packet. , . --- ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS.—The following gentlemen, having undergone the necessary examinations for the diploma, were admitted members of the College at the meeting of the Court of Examiners on the 16th inst. : Messrs. William Tait Carr, Aberdeen; Frederic James Caldecott, Dorking, Surrey; John Wilde, Islington; William Warwick, Belfast ; Henry Simpson, Chester; Henry Power, London ; Ebenezer Moore, Islington ; Edwin Wilson, Hyde, Cheshire; Richard Wellings, Ravenstone, Leicestershire; Albert William Hanford, Nottingham; Francis Trevelyan Buckland, Deanery, Westminster; Ed ward George Wake, Hull; Henry Cornelius Thomas, Vaux hall-road; John Fountain, Cowley, Middlesex; and Alfred Carpenter, Rothwell, Northampton. Admitted on the 16th inst : Messrs. Thomas White, Chester ; Edward Long, Dublin ; Frederick William Wilders, Chesterton, Hunting donshire ; George Brennan, Cork ; Nevill Jackson, Stam ford, Lincolnshire ; Edward Rails ' Tunbridge, Kent ; Thomas Britton, York; John Davis, Sunderland; Jacobus Silverman, Middlesex place, Paddington ; and Lancelot Armstrong, Camberwell. SIQUESTERED BENEFICES.--A Bill has been return weillircall brought sequestration into Parliament to amend the law relating to the t c h q a u t e s s e t:a e t ra io i n ca o s f es b o e f n:fices for debt. If a benefice is seques teredpassing of the Act of' not under the existing law, the bishop of the diocese has ment po o l f ve r to set apart more than 200/. a year for the pay es to discharge the ministerial duties. From a provides that in allc _ was made to Parliament last year it appears sequestration have taken place since the 400/. a year in va are of considerable Parliament, and some of these livings value with several churches. The Bill tion for the debts of an a s t a e a s ll 'wher e a benefice which exceeds hereafter be put under sequestra may, if he thinks propeyr, payment of a curate or curuactte parish incumbent,de the bishop of the diocese one-half the income for the to discharge the spiritual duties connected with the IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF The SPEAKER took o'clock. MONS, May 79. ;hair shortly before Four THIRD The following Bills passed:— Midland Railway (Ext York, Newcastle, and B West Durham Railwa Taw Vale Railway and D CONSIDERA rADINGS. illod a third time and rime, &a.). ailway (Branch to the ~ [ON OF BILLS. On the motion for considering the Chorley Water works Bill, Mr. CARDWELL, on behalf of the corporation of Liverpool, complained that the promoters of this Bill had departed from their original Act of Parliament in the appropriation of their capital. The corporation of Liverpool petitioned against the present Bill, the object of which was to raise additional capital; but the Com mittee, acting under the impression that the corporation could apply to one of the courts of law to redress the grievance which they complained of, refused to hear them. - Now it so happened that the promoters of the Bill had so framed their original Act as to preclude that appeal to a court of law, and therefore, unless the House at this stage inserted a proviso to the contrary, this Bill would trench upon certain works of the Liverpool corporation and seriously injure the rate payers of that town. He moved the insertion of a pro viso to that effect. Mr. CHRISTOPHER opposed the proviso, and, as Chairman of the Committee which sat upon this Bill, defended the course that had been taken by that body. This Bill simply authorised the Chorley Water Works Company to raise an additional capital of 12,0001. to carry out certain works which had already been sanc tioned by Parliament, and the Committee were at a loss to know how it could injure Liverpool. Mr. HEYWOOD supported the Bill, and fully con curred in the decision of the Committee. After some further discussion, in which Mr. W. Brown, Mr. Thornely, Mr. Brotherton, and Mr. Greene took part, the proviso was withdrawn. The Bill was then considered and agreed, to, as were also the following Bills: Liverpool Docks (Alteration of Management, &c.) Midland Railway (Purchase of Leeds and Bradford Railway, and Increase of Capital). Midland Railway (Regulation and Increase of Capital, &c.) Weston-super-Mare Improvement and Ma rket. HARWICH ELECTION. Mr. K. SEYMER brought up the report of the Harwich Election Committee unseating Mr. Prinsep, and declaring the last election to be void. NEW WRIT. On the motion of Sir W. HAYTER, a new writ was ordered for Clackmannan and Killross, ia the room of Sir W. Morrison, deceased. PETITIONS. Mr. ANDERSON presented a petition from the Shetland Islands complaining of the burdens upon land. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL presented serveral petitions from Limerick and Dublin, and other places in Ireland, against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. Mr. COWAN presented a petition from Edinburgh in favour of this Bill. Mr. FRESEIFIELD presented several petitions from parishes in Lincolnshire w the same effect. Mr. COWAN presented petitions from Edinburgh against the Distilled Spirits 13111, stating That they had never been consulted with respect to the Bill now before the House, and that the Bill as it now it tood would be injurious to their interests. Mr. CORBALLY presented several petitions against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. Mr. REYNOLDS presented petitions to the same effect from the undermentioned places:—B ray, in Wick low; Thurlos, Tipperary; Killskeery, Tyrone; Lisburn and Hillsborough, Down and Antrim; Dunabate and Portrave, Dublin; Kilcar, Donegal county; Clones, Monaghan ; Tessuagh, Tipperary ; Tn llinghohegby, Donegal; Aughabery, Monaghan; Killnip pe and Dun sany, Meath; Bellynderry, 'Tyrone and AL ntrim; Bath naskill, Galway; St. Nicholas Without, Dublin; Dublin Cemeteries Committee (which on the motion of the Hon. Gentleman was read from the table); Durs.auly, Leitrim; Bridgetown, Garrybarry, and Killaboe, Clare. Mr. JOHN O'BRIEN presented a peieition from the Chamber of Commerce of the city of Limerick, praying that the Towns Improvement Bill be suspended till the wards of that city be reconstructed on the principle of the Dublin Improvement Act ; also a petition from a public meeting of the ratepayers aud citizens of Limerick, praying that the Towns Improvement Bill, with certain modifications, may pass into Law. Mr. R. M. FOX presented a petition from the county of Longford against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, which he moved should be read at the table of the House. The petition was then read by the Clerk at the table. • SEWERS ACT. Lord DUNCAN wished to ask the Right Hon. tho Secretary of State for the Home Department when he proposed to bring in his new Bill respecting the Com missioners of Sewers.? Sir G. GREY could not name the day now, but ample notice would be given of it beforehand. DINGLE WORKHOUSE. Mr. REYNOLDS asked the Chief Secretary for Ire laud a question respecting the investigation held it the Dingle workhouse, county of Kerry. ; and -whether the Protestant - chaplain, and other paid officiate, alleged to have bribed Catholic paupers to become Prottestants, are still continued in their respective appointmeiets ? Sir W. SOMERVILLE said an inquiry had been in stituted into the meter by the Poor-law Commissioners, and it hid transpired that they had been in the habit of distributing small sums amongst the Protestant inmates of the Dingle workhouse, but it was more for the pur poses of charity than anything else. Mr. REYNOLDS wished to know if the Eon. Baronet had any objection to lay the paper relating to that before the House? 'Sir W. SOMERVILLE had none whatever. THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE. Ur. HUME asked the Under• Secretary for the Colo nies whether he would have any objection to lay on the table the last dispatch received from the Cape respecting the expense of the Kafir. war? Mr. HAWES said if the Hon. Member would put his question to-morrow be would be in a positiotn i to give an answer. In reply to Mr. ADDERLEY, Lord J. RUSSELL said it was the intention of the Government to appoint assistant Commissioners to pro. ced to the Cape to inquire into the affairs of Kafraria. Mr. ROEBUCK wished to know what powers the Commissioners would have to make peace with the Kafir tribes? Lord J. RUSSELL said Sir Harry Smith was Chief Commissioner.—(A laugh.) VISITS OF GOVERNMENT OFFICERS TO THE EXHIBITION. Mr. HUME said he understood it was the intention of the Government to give leave of absence to dockyard servants for six or ten days to enable them to come to London to see the Exhibition, and he wished to know whether the Government were to pay their ex penses; and also, whether they would have any objec tion to extend tee same privilege to other public servants? Sir F. BARING replied that the Admiralty had given leave to the officers employed in the dockyards, who were anxious to attend the Exhibition, to be absent two days in London, but they did not propose to pay their expenses either in coming up or in rvturnino . .—(llear.) _ ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL. Mr. NlooftEe;:n;die;er;l petitions from Ireland against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. _ - Mr. SPOONER presented two petitions against Papal aggression. Mr. ROCHE presented several petitions from Tip perary against the Bill. Sir JOHN YOUNG presented several petitions from the county of Durham to the same effect. Mr. W. Miles from Gloucestershire, and Mr. Hope and Sir John Trollopo from Rants, presented petitions to the same effect. Dr. POWER presented several petitions from different places in Ireland against the Bill. Mr. KEA.TING and Mr. LAWLESS presented several petitions, the latter, chiefly from Clonmel, against the Bill. Mr. SADLEIR also presented petitions against the Bill. Colonel CHATTERTON presented a petition from Cork in favour of the Bill. Several other petitions were presented in favour of and against the Bill. The House then resolved itself into Committee, and on the motion being made to proceed, Mr. REYNOLDS rose and said, that he moved that the Chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again.—(Loud laughter from all sides of the House.) Gentlemen might laugh at such a motion, but they should recollect that when the House lent sat upon this question an understanding was come to that the First Lord of the Treasury should decide before they sat again as to the course which he intended to pursue with regard to this Bill. It was quite evident that no such understanding had been come to, and that no course had been adopted which was at all likely to lead to the settlement of the question.—(Hear, hear.) Members might cheer, but those who were most ready to give that ironical notice of their feelings, might be of a different opinion when they came to hoar the reason which he had to adduce for thus moving that the Chairman should now report progress. He had care fully studied this Bill, and had been somewhat asto nished at the form which its several clauses lit.d assumed. The understanding not having been carried out, he felt himself perfectly justified in the couse which he now pur sued, of moving that the Chairman report progress. It should be recollected that this was not the first Bill or even the second Bill, for it was entirely a different Bill from that which had been originally introduced. The Right. Hon. Baronet at the head of the Home De partment had voluntarily abandoned the secor,d and third clauses of the Bill, but he had retained the first. During the course of the debate the Honourable Mem ber for Midhurst, Mr. Walpole, had placed a notice on the books which materially affected the whole subject. By that arrangement the whole of the evil was still con tinued, and the first clause curtained all tbe mischief. That clause he called the Walpole clause. • There was also another clause of the most insulting nature to him and his co-religionists, namely, that clauso which the Secretary of State had manufactured out of the proviso which had been originally introduced to exempt the Scotch Episcopalian bishops from the operation of the Bill. That was what he called making "fish of one and flesh of the other," and he would like to know whether the Noble Lord would introduce just such another clauso for the benefit of the Roman Catholic bishops of the United King dom. Another reason for his making this mu- tion was, that there wcro several anaendaieTts which did not apply to the Bill in its present shape; and would it not, therefore, be reasonable to permit the Chairman to report .progress, in order to enable Ron. Members to have time to see what those amendments really were? The many-tongued animal the press had lately been devoting great space to the proceedings of what was called the Irish brigade, and remarked on the dearth of talent in the Irish ranks, asking where were the Currans, the Grattans, the Sheridans, the Plunkets? He might well retaliate, and pointing to the Treasury bench, ask where were the Foxes— (Laughter) —the Burkes, and the Pitts? He was one who liked precedents, and if they were reproached for wasting the time of the House, which they had not yet done, he would refer them to an edition of Lord Brougham's speeches, edited by himself, for the course which was taken by the party to which the Noble Lord now at the head of the Government belonged, in 1816, for the protection of the people of this country. Having read the opinion of Mr. Brougham, when he was a Member of the. House, relative to the propriety of of fering every description of opposition to an obnoxious tax, that example being set by him, and having had his approval after the lapse of upwards of twenty years. He should be glad to know whether it was fair or reasonable of the Noble Lord, and those who acted with him, to taunt him (Mr. Reynolds) and those who voted as he voted; with wasting the time of the House, because he merely did what their bad policy had given him permission to do. He trusted the Noble Lord would not object to the Chairman reporting progress. He wished to offer no factious opposition to the Bill—A laugh)— but simply wanted to have time to consider the Bill in its altered state. If such a concession were made by the Government, a great deal of time and trouble would be saved. He therefore felt justified in moving, as an amendment, that the Chairman now report progress. Sir GEORGE GREY said he would leave it to the consideration of the Committee, whether the course pursued by the Hoa. Gentleman was or was not in ac cordance with the understanding which was arrived at by the House on Friday evening.—(Hear, hear.) He trusted that the House would not be led into the discussion of the different topics to which the Hon. Gentleman had adverted. Whatever might be the ob ject of the Hon. Gentleman it could have no other effect than to prevent the House adopting the arrangement of Friday night, viz., that they should proceed with the consideration of the clauses of the Bill. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY seconded the amendment. Mr. ROEBUCK said that there were such stringent regulations in that Bill that if they were to be per severed in they would call into question all the tenets of the Roman Catholic faith.—(Hear, hear.) and cheers.) This was not the same Bill; it was a new Bill, and therefore it ought to go through all the pro cesses of a new Bill.—(Hear, hear.) It was not the Bill at all which the Noble Lord had first introduced. It was altogether a new Bill.—(Hear, hear.) He confessed that he was not able to understand it.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had, with all his constitutional earnestness, pressed the Bill upon the House, and yet what had been the effect ? Why, that the Bill had been entirely changed. Did he then ask for anything that was unrea sonable? Nothing of the kind. He only asked for time for deliberation. The Ministry, with a large ma jority at their back, might, it was true, press for a consummation of their designs; but, to say the least of it, it was evidently unconstitutional, and he should therefore vote for the motion.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. GLADSTONE regretted equally the motion and the necessity for its being made, but it was evident that a great change had been made, not only in the Bill itself, but in the spirit of the Bill also, causing it to become altogether a different thing to that which it formerly was. Within the whole course of his Parliamentary experience, he had never met with anything equal to this, and he did there fore feel that they bad no right whatever to enter upon legislation on this subject until they had had advice from the first law officers of the Crown. Any gentleman might get up and introduce words which would altogether alter the tenor and the force of the Bill. How then could they proceed ? This Bill contained three operative clauses; of these three two were rendered void. What would they do if his Honourable and Learned Friend the Member for Midhurst had attacked the Pope's brief itself. He said that that brief was in itself invalid, and quite illegal, in this country. This proposition the Ministry had adopted, and it was therefore plain that nothing could be done soundly at least without that legal advice of which they now stood so much in need. Was it not also known to the House that there was another rescript from the Papal authority for the division of the Roman Ca tholic diocese of Ross, which was now separated from the diocese of Cloyne. Acc Tding to this measure that rescript would be also void. He, therefore, hoped that the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) or the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir G. Grey) would in form the House as to the legal character and bearings of the present Bill; and he also wished to know whether the excluded clause would be brought back to the Bill, and whether, if so, it would have the retrospective force of annulling the past rescript of the Pope, and also of de feating the late episcopal jurisdiction in Ireland, to which he had already adverted? Lord J. RUSSELL said the Committee had two ques tions to consider which ought to be kept separate. The first was the question of the Hon. Member for Dublin, who had moved that the Chairman should report pro gress and ask leave to sit again; and whatever the Noble Lord the Member for Arundel might say, he could not agree to that course, - because ho had no security, when they came on Friday next to consider the Bill, that the Noble Lord might not, without any factious motive, pro pose that the Chairman should leave the chair; and thus they would be in no better position than they were at the present moment. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) took another course, and said that in going into a Bill of so much importance as this, especially when the first clause was not originally in the Bill, but had been lately introduced, some member of the Govern ment ought to explain the general scope of the clauses and what would be their practical effect; and be (Lord J. Russell) would not deny, if the other questions were disposed of; that it would be fair, when they came to read the clause, that the Attorney-General should explain to the Committee the view which ho took of that clause and what would be its legal effect. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY understood that the agreement came to on last Friday night was, that there should be no division on the motion of the Speaker leaving the chair, but that there was no farther pledge given on their part; and he should add that, when the Noble Lord stated that there was no security for a legitimate discussion, there existed a right for every Hon. Gentleman to avail himself of all the forms of the House against so obnoxious a measure.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. ROEBUCK contended that the present was a new Bill altogether, and that it was nothing but just and fair that its principles soould be considered. Sir R. H. INGLIS admitted that the law officers of the Crown should explain the nature of the new clause, particularly as that clause was as improvement in the Bill. Mr. P. HOWARD said that if the Government ac ceded to the suggestion of Mr. Gladstone, then Mr. Reynclds might with great propriety withdraw his mo tion. It they obtained from the law officers of the Crown a full and distinct explanation of ail the bearings of the measure, they could reserve their opposition till it had reached a future stage. Mr. HORSMAN said that if the Hon. Member for Dublin would withdraw his motion so as to enable the statement to be made by the Attorney-General, is ac cordance with the suggestion of the Right lion. Gentle man opposite (Mr. Gladstone), to which the Noble Lard had acceded, the [lon. Member would not be in a worse position than he was at present. As some misunder standing seemed to exist as to what happened on Friday last, and as he was present on the occasion ho wished to observe that the statement of his Noble Friend behind him (Lord Arund , l and Surrey) as to the arrangement entered into on that occasion was correct. The Hon. Gentlemen who were concerned in the arrangement stated, on that occasion, that they agreed to the Noble Lord's suggestion, on condition that on Monday they would not be bound by it, beyond the question that the Speaker do leave the chair, and to that condition the Noble Lord assented. Lord J. RUSSELL observed that what he had stated was, that when they came to the first clause the At• torney-General would make a statement with respect to the bearing and legal effects of that clause. That did not touch the question of the preamble. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE thought that if the motion of the Hon. Member for Dublin was within the strict let ter, it was not within the spirit of the arrangement. That arrangement was that no opposition should be made to the Speaker leaving the chair; but having agreed to the Speaker leaving the chair, what possible use was there in demanding that he should be put into it again immediately, for that was the object of the motion of the Hon, Member for Dublin? Ho thought the Hon. Gentleman ought to allow the first reading of the Bill, and on the question that it be read a second time the Attorney-General should make his statement. He thought the Noble Lord had hardly kept faith with the House. For having before Easter called on all Hon Gentlemen who had amendments to propose in the Bill to place them on the paper, and that after the Easter re cess he would state which of them he would accept and which reject, the Noble Lord, on the House assembling after the recess, stated that h e w ou ld no t accep t t h e amendment of the lion. Member for Midhurst. Yet the Noble Lord bad sent the Attorney-General to the Hon. Member for Midhurst in order to " cook up" a new Bill with him; but it appeared they could not agree upon it. However, as the House did not know at the present mo ment where in the Bill the Hon. Member for Midhurst meant to place his amendments, that of itself consti tuted a ground for a‘king a few days' delay. Ho sug gested that the Lion. Member withdraw his motion, and that they should at once have the statement of the Attor ney-General. Mr. B. ROCHE took the same view of the arrange ment of Friday night as the Noble Lord (Arundel and Surrey). Mr: 'KEOGH said that the arrangement bad been made between him and th© Noble Lord, and if he con ceived he were violating the spirit of that arrangement in supporting the motion of the lion. Member for Dublin, he would not vote for it. But he was convinced that that motion violated neither the spirit nor the letter of that undentanding; neither bad the Noble Lord ac cused them of such a thing, but the Right Honourable Gentleman (Sir George Grey) hinted it. What happened Ras this. He asked the Noble Lord to consent to the re-printing of the Bill; the Noble Lord at first refused, and the House now saw that he (Mr. Keogh) had just and reasonable groends for that request. The Noble Lord afterwards consented, on condition that on Monday he should be placed in the same position with respect to the Bill as he was then; he (Mr. Keogh) agreed, pro vided that he and his friends should also be put in the same position—namely, that on the Speaker leaving the chair they should make ever, species of oppoxition to the Bill that they deemed expedient. That was the arrangement agreed to, tied h e i ns i ste d i t had not b een vi ol a ted in spirit or letter by them. As re garded the proposition just made by the Noble Lord, he understood the Noble Lord admitted the justice of the Right Hon. Gentleman's (Mr. Gladstone's) appeal, for he had said that if they took one step, it was but right that he himself or the Attorney General should make a statement. Now the Chairman of Committees had just informed him that it was necessary to move that the Bill be read a first and second time, because of the alterations made in it; but that if it were the same Bill it would not be necessary. The Noble Lord had adopted a great por tion of the Hon. Member for Midhurst's amendment; let the Attorney-General then make his statement, and afterwards let them adjourn the question to Friday next, in order that they might have an opportunity of fully considering the provisions of the Bill as amended. The Noble Lord had undertaken to have the Bill reprinted, bat it had not been delivered to Hon. Members until late that morning. On that ground alone they were entitled to have it adjourned. Mr. WALPOLE said that he had given notice of his amendments on the second reading of the Bill; and they had been put on the paper before the Easter re cess, so that it could not be with justice said that the House was taken by surprise with respect to those amendments. After the Easter recess the Noble Lord stated that he did not object in principle to the first clause, which he (Mr. Walpole) proposed, for that it was in substance already contained in the Bill. He (Mr. Walpole) met the Attorney-General by accident in the street, and spoke to him on the subject of his amendments, wondering that the plan therein suggested had not been adopted by the Government. Oa the fol lowing day he had a conversation with the Attorney- General on the subject of his amendments, a portion of which the Government objected to, and another por tion they did not object to. But, until he came down on Friday last, the Government were under no arrange - ment with him either to reject or accept them. How there could be any such compromise, he could not understand, for he approved of the principle of the Bill, and he could see nothing objectionable in an Ron. Member who supported a Bill communicating with the Attorney-General, who had the conduct of the Bill, in order to see how far any amendments he meant to pro pose in the Bill were objectionable or not. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE—It was the Noble Lord himself who had stated he had sent the Attorney-General to the Hon. Member for Midhurst. Lord J. RUSSELL—The Hon. and Learned Gentle man had said very truly that he had met the Attorney. General by accident, and the latter had most properly cold him (Lord J.Russell) that he bad some conversation with the Hon. and Learned Member for Mid burst with respect to his amendments, but he did not wish to com municate furth©r with him without his (Lord J. Russell's) authority. He (Lord J. Russell) did not give - him any explicit directions on the matter, but gave him his autho rity to communicate with the Hon. and Learned Gentle man respecting it. Mr. HUME said the question was, whether the expla nation asked for should be given on the motion that the preamble be postponed, or on the first clause. It ap peared to him a matter of very little importance on which it was given. After a few words from Mr. S. CRAWFORD, Mr. MOORE reminded the House that the Hon. Mem ber for Athlone had a notice on the paper of a motion with respect to the postponement of the preamble, and it was quite impossible therefore to accede to the postpone ment of the preamble now. Mr. REYNOLDS would not enter into any explana tion respecting Friday night's arrangement, as it had been already explained by the Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Athlone. He was prepared to withdraw his motion only on the'specific understanding that the At torney-General should be permitted to explain the Bill as amended, and after that explanation was made, that no further progress should be attempted by the Govern ment with the Bill until Friday. Lord J. RUSSELL could not agree to the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman. The amendment was then negatived without a division. The amended Bill was then read a first and second time. On the question that the preamble be postponed, Nr. REYNOLDS moved that the Chairman report progress. The Committee then divided, when there appeared— For the amendment ... 46 Against it 262 aj °city 216 The preamble was postponed accordingly. On the first clause being put from the chair, The AT rORNEY-GENERAL, understanding it was the general wish of the House he should make a state ment of the legal effect of the provisions of the Bill, felt it to be his duty to do so on the present occasion. In the first place, he totally and entirely disagreed with those Hon. Members who said that the Bill was a new Bill. The only clause to which he proposed to attach any observations, in the first instance, was the first clause, as that was tho clause alleged to contain certain matter which made the Bill a new measure. He was, however, prepared to show that this clause effected no alteration whatever in reality in the character of. the Bill; but that, on the contrary, it left that measure sub stantially the same as before. As the Bill stood before, the preamble recited " that whereas certain of her Ma jesty's subjects, by virtue of a pretended authority of the See of Rome, had asenened titles out of provinces, dio ceses, and towns in her Majesty's kingdoms." It then went on to refer to the Act 10 (ieo. IV., c. 7, in which was to be found an enactment providing against the as sumption of any such style or title as regarded pro vinces and dioceses already occupied by the Church of England, making it an offence, and affixing thereto a penalty. After this, it proceeded to recite that the at accept to establish such etylc seid titles having been made, t declared it expeaient to prohibit such assumption, and then went on to recite the penalty fixed in the second clause as applicable to the case. The second clause made the assumption of titles not included in the 10th Geo. IV., c. 7, illegal; in other words, it placed provinces, cities, and towns not appropriated by the Established Church on the same tooting as those in that Act, subjecting those who took such titles to the same penalty as was provided Isy that statute. The other clause—that originally suggested. by the Hon. and Learned Member for Midhurse—was the clause which it was suggested created a new Bill of the measure. But that clause was purely declaratory. It embodied only the recitals in the preamble, which went to say that cer tain persons had done a certain thing which ought to be prevented; and it merely asserted that this recital should be held legally valid. The first clause, which was sug gested by the Hon. and Learned Member, might strike the House as superfluous ; but a great desire had been ex pressed that itshould be adopted to mark the sense of the country on the subject. There was an ievasion—and it was desired that there should be a declaration of Parlia ment on the subj-ct to go tor th to the world. It ap peared to him (the Attorney-General) to add nothing to the Bill; as far as punishment for the offence was in ques. tion, or as far as the penalty wae concerne 1, while it gave a more solemn form to the declaration. As it was no hardship, and gave some satisfaction to a great number of persons, to vindicate the national Sovereignty, there could not, in his opinion, be any possible harm in adopting it. The Bill, however, was no new Bill. The clause was only what it purported to be—a recital of the preamble, aria giving it more expli citly. With regard to the second clause, it had been already so much discussed, that he could not understand how any person could tail to sea its bearings. It amounted to this—that the Act 10 Geo. IV., which now applied in terms only to titles alro ady appropriated by the Established Church, was proptjeed to be applied to titles not so appropriated. An aeaempt was made to parcel out England into provinces and dioceses by an authority which had no foundation in the constitution, and to assume titles and dignities aa arising out of these divisions, at th© instance of a foreign power. The cl ause proposed these titles should be void; and that the places from whence they purported to be d erived should be put in the same category as those place s referred to in the 10th Geo. IV. It did no more and no less. And when it was urged that this clause would interfere with the operation of the Charitable Bequs sts Act, the simple answer to that allegation was, tnat the 10th George IV. did not interfere with it, and this (;11111S3 applied only to titles not included in that Act. He (the Attorney- General) should be trifling with too time and patience of the House if he added another word to the legal explana tion which he was called on to gicv, as, after the long discussion which the Bill had und, :agony, nothing new could be said by him on the subject. Mr. P. HOWARD contended th it the Bill was essen tially a new Bill. If it were not ; to, it would not have been read a first and a second time o by the Chairman. Besides, the date on the amended Bill was altered. Now, the Bill being a new Bill, he considered that the House had not been treated with sufficient candour by the Go vernment, who submitted it in a priatted form that morn ing, and forced on a discussion of its provisions almost immediately afterwards. Mr. K. SEYMER called the 31`,tentio n of the law officers of the Crown to the fact, that while the Bill relating to de clared illegal the bull or spostolicletters to somewhat similar England, it omitted all reference to, the diocese of Ross bull or Papal rescript underw 3hne s I.a fared tion a necessarysoverei g n f t o y r had recently been constituted in rebind. If IPgisla tion in express terms were upholding the independence of t in England, he certainly thought.. it was equally war Queen by persons of im portant it should be . adopted for Ireland, where had actually been levied against e .h station, who were now sufferi Lgt e penalty of th e i r some crimes. The SOLICITOR - GENERAL said the answer to the question of the Hon. Gentleman was simple. Under the Statute of Prxmunire, acts performed in accordance with the directions of Pa pal reec r i pts or foreign bulls w ere declared to be illegal. In th e t i me of James 11. Lalor was punished for such an o fence; and since that period —although twe centuries r ind a half had elapsed —up to the recent aggression, no 5; übicot of the British Crown had dared to act upon tb o dictum of a foreign bull. The Pope's recent rescript, being the first for two centuries and a half; which had pi tactical effect in this country, it was thought proper to ( leclare it, and all acts performed by reason of its directi. ins, illegal and void. But it did not follow that because they had done so in this particular instance, it, was ne sessary to declare all the minor instruments which fol! owed from the same quarter illegal and void, when the y were so by existing statute. Ile conAdered the must c ignified course was to take up the monstrous instruint or dividing England into dioceses, a n d h av i ng Tecifico. declared its teh galiiy, to leave all similar instruments to be dealt w - - as illegal. rilr. GLADSTONE said he could not pz. , rceive that this was a declaratory clan so. Dochlratory clauses in legislative enactments usually succeeded a recital that the state of the law was doubtful; !but here nothing of the sort was done. They declareJ by their Bill, with out reference to any other matter, that the act of the Pope was iikgal, and ha confessed tfiat this appeared to him to bea very unu9ual proceeding. It seemed him that parties would be at a loss to understand whether this was a declaratory clause or no t; but if it were a de claratory clause, what need was Otero for decloriug that which had already been decided? He wanted to know whether the same effect would be produced by the Bill, as it stotal then, as was intended by the Bill as it origi nally stood. His supposition, of course, was immaterial, but he certainly supposed that the first clause would have that effect. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL expleined that the objection which led to the withdrawal of the second clause was, that it had E t retrospective effcet of a dan gerous character. The Roman Catholic prelates of Ire land said, that under what they conceived to be the con atruction of the Act of 1829, they had retained the ee clteiestical titles, which were forbidden by that Aot They considered that they were quite right in so read ing the Act, and therefore requested that they m i g ht be left in the same position (2. Bit placed them in. No be (the Solicitor-General) entertained great doubt as to whether they had acted rightly under that Act; bn t , whether that were so or not, if these prelates were right under the old Act, they would continue to be so atilt; , and if they were wrong under the old Act, they would be equally wrong now. All that had been conceded in striking out the second clause. If the Pope could pro' to prohibit let them proceed. There was no clause there prohibit him, and as it w a s m a tt er o f d o ubt whether 0 could legally proceed, he was entitled to the benefit of the doubt. Mr. GLADSTONE said the Hon. and Learned Gen' ileman had not ans w er e d hi s ques ti on as t o w hat would be the eff ec t o f t h e c l ause, not w i t h reference to Irish, ' but English sees. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied that Engli sh Roman Cath o li c bi s h ops woul d stand in prec i se ly 11 same way as th e I r i s h R oman C athol i c bi s h ops stotta If Irish bishops were right English bishops would Os° be right, but he had his doubts. Mr. M'CLILLAGH said the Pope's proceedings if relation to the bishopric of Ross was not the first cas e !, the kind, for in the di ocese o f Galway there was a n ew bishopric,'created under precisely similar circumstances' Why, then, was that case not taken up if the act was illegal? He did not think the Hon. and Learned Ge n ' tleman had answered the Right Hon. Gentleman's clur s c i tion, whether the subtraction of the second and sh' r clauses was a real charge, and w h et h er t h e retention °f the first clause really did not tend to invalidate every act done by Roman Catholic bish o p s s i nce t h e i r a p P cin meat and the passing of the Act o f 1829. T here were . very grave do u bt s on thi s p o i nt ra i sed by the 106 d learned authorities in the law, and it therefore behave the legal advisers of the Crown to grapple with the doubts' tint fact, to decide th e quest i on at once—to decide it, tit n fact, in that House.—(Hear, hear.) Th e House Ng: . to know whether it was the Bill of Febr uar y, of gsr°;,,. other of April, or the f our th Bill , a com b ination of the t' Bills—the Bill of May—they were discussing. He wished to deal with the doubt he had referred to on broad grounds' and he hoped the House would require its clear solution' If violations of the Act of 1829 had occurred, why were they suffered to sleep u p t o t hi s moment? If the present Bill was not a per secut i ng A ct, w h y were the doubt s about the first clause not cleared up? With respect tl the Bequests Act, he contended, though it did not rePe ll the Act of 1829, yet having been recognised by Geyer : l3 : i ment and by Sir Ed war d S ug d en, such a recogoitit amounted to a virtual a b negat i on o f t h e Act o f 182° Whatever the words of the Bequests Act, they W e l really and actually intended to give validity to what O h been done by the Roman Catholic bishops, even thong" it was in presumed contravention of the Act of 1829. P t : wanted to know what were to become of beget; granted to bishops in trust, arid to their successors? h`„ believed that question had not yet been dealt with in it: entirety. The way in which the clause would ope n : would not so much punish the usurper of titles, as it Pr"; fessed to do—as it would operate against the wishes 0' intentions of the pious and humble Roman Catholic. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said this was e n ; the place to di scuss l ega l quest ions—(ol9—but he w as quite ready to state his opinion in explanation of ;"" question in issue. However learned and specific ;b e opinions on the question obtained by the Hon. Member' he must take l eave t o d ou b t t h at such mischief as list been stated w ou ld fl ow f rom the measure. The e ff e ct of the clause, as h e h a d a l ready stated, was to putt certain class of tru s t ees un d er the operation of the Itt' 10th Geo. IV. Now, h e wou ld as k w h ether any fata l mischief had hitherto resulted from that Act? Itractii cally it had not, and he sh ou ld say t h at the wording,° that Act might fairly be t a k en as a counterpart XV° result and operation of the working of the present men' sure. If money were to be left fol. the purpose of en' sowing a bishopric, and prohibited titles were used , then he agreed that the operation of the mes' sure would effect such a bequest—but if the t_ tt e . ' quest was left i n diff erent terms, then din' rent consequences w ou ld f o ll ow . If, in contra' vention of the law, a bequest was made in terms which an Act of Parliam en t d ec l are d s h ou ld ma k e such b equ est illegal and void—then the party sa leaving the beques t must take the consequences of his own act. If th e bequest were left for charitable purposes, even though loft in an illegal form, a court of equity would only looter to the intentions of the testator. If titles were used in relation to persons who were to carry out the intentions , of the testator, which wer e ill ega l, th e C ourt would 5611 give effect to the intentions of the testator. The Coa: would not let an incorrect d es i g n at i on i n t er f ere with the leaving of money for charitable purposes. So, there' fore, the present measure yvould not be attended with the mischief which had been predicted, and the opinions of the legal persons to the contrary would not be found to be correct. The Act of 10 Geo. IV. had been in (spy ration 22 years; that Act made the assumption of titles by Roman Catholic bishops illegal, yet be quests had fora that time been made to Roman Catholic bishops for ohs' ritatsle purposes; and he would ask, had there been found any practical difficulty or inconvenieuce in adminir tering those charities? If there had been, let the fact be brought before the Ho use , an d it would be deal; with at once. But no difficulty or inconvenience 0 yet had been felt, and it was therefore not reason able to expect that it would be found with regard to the Bequests Act—that is, provided no violation of the law gave invalidity to the intentions of the testator. He would remind Hon. Gentlemen how cautiously the Act had been framed—the words were, " exercising or officiating within the district." This would apply 1 ° the class of cases under discussion, because it was essens tial that the religious intentions of her Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects should be properly carried out. The Bequests Act was carefully framed, so as to leave the Roman Catholic bishops untouched so long as no in fraction of the law was committed, by giving to them titles by law prohibited. This, however, was not the piece to enter upon an elaborate legal argument; be , however, thought it advisable to state his candid opinion on the question. Mr. NAPIER said that when the proper time arrived he should be fully prepared to answer many of the argil' merits which had been offered in opposition to this Mr. M. GIBSON said that as a great deal of doubt seemed to he entertained as to the operation of this Bill , it behoved them at present to introduce such provisions into the Bill as would obviate any future misinterpreta tion. At present a Scotch bishop was exempt from ;he consequences which attached to the same offence in England and in Ireland, though for what principle he could not tell. On the 26th of October, 1851, the clauses submitted to the Roman Catholic School Com" mittee by her Majesty's Committee of Privy Council on Education recognised in terms the Roman Catholic bishop of ecclesiistical districts which Awas a subject that demanded explanati on . Th e pr i est so ordained is to manage the religious instructions of those schools, and no priest is to interfere who is not authorised by • -- the Rom - in Catholic bi s hop — of the district. Then, be said, that if the Privy Council actually agreed to that in November last, atter the Papal brief had been pub lished, does it not seem monstrous that now they should be legislating to fine a man a hundred pounds if he called himself a Roman Catholic bishop of a district?-- - (Hear, hear.) An Act more complex and difficult than this to understand he bak never heard. House to t.--hl3eLcißuleCstliionTbilefEoSrelGitE, whichß be vva Sir begged to reca s, whether l preamble should bo postponed for further cons id era tion? He had never considered this as a new Bill. Th e o bj e ct the of this motion was to enable them to have a fuller dis cussion en this Bill, or rath: r this portion of the Bill. He would suggest that they should be allowed to pro' ceed to the discussion of the preamble. :dr. ROCHE said that the Attorney-General was of opinion that this Bill had no greater scope than the former Bill, but up jumped the Learned Solicitor . General and said that this new clause was more powerfu l than anything in the old Bill, and it would extend to Ireland. New, what would be its effect on the diocese of Ross? That diocese had been for ages united to th e diocese of Cloyse. He o ug ht to know something aboil! that dioce, ait was in his di s t r i ct . Th e pra ctical result of uniting Ross and Cloyne was, that the spiritual cure of the two dioceses was carried out more efficiently . What did they propose to do by this Bill? They pr c T posed to r , ler the uni on o f t h ese two e i oceses ill e gal' How could the lion. and Learned Gentleman th e Attorney-General, get up in his place and say that the Emancipation Act had been the law of the laud in Ire land for two and twenty years. Practically, it had nor" been carried into effect in Ireland. The more they meddled with this Bill the deeper they would got into the mire. Mr. PHILLIP HOWARD said the suggestion of the Hon. Member for Manchester (Mi. Milner Gibson) was a very valuable one, that they should now explain how, when the Privy Council lately recognised Roman Ca' tholic bishops of districts, they now proposed to fine soY man who called himself Roman Catholic bishop of $ diocese a hundred pounds. Lord BERNARD said, the mere question a t i s sue was, what was the attack of the Bishop of Rome on this, counts; ? It was a direct attack on the sovereignty o f our Queen. Had not he termed the glorious reformation the Ans;lican schism? In the early Church the appoint ment of bishops remained with the people at large. Al' terwards it fell into the hands of the clergy, and now in this country, it had practically fallen into the hands of the Crown. What he wished to dwell upon was this —that the family of Stuart being extinct, whose title to nominate these bishops was not denied, the present sr pointmert by the Pepe, without consu l t i ng the Sore' reign, was a virtual denial of the rights of our present Gracious Sovereign. There was one word more which he had to say upon the subject. It was said the feelings of the people were indifferent en this subject. Such was n ot the case in Ireland ; b ut they thought it was a wil e / . policy to leave the subject to b e d cc i dsd by the lmper's; Parliament, b u t the) felt the greatest indignation against the atrocious att empt of the Court of Rome, and e would give his support to any efficient measure to re strain the insidious attempts made against the Pro testant relisrfo.s. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE asked the Noble Lord a t the head of the Government to inform them what his w ishes were upon the actual question before them. What di d sthaiedNroebscleriLord mean by saying in his Bill that " t he pt was illegal end void!" Where was the re. H© did not see it • it was not on the table of to ° How could theccliscuss it unless it was 'li d before them? LordJ:itUSELL thought it was mugh the better ~~ Jul ltif Beg 11/ I tri i d , ti