The Sun. — London, England, 1822-06-08 00:00:00

1 1.k. 4W A‘axti tet-t.-J* * NUMBER 9294.] 0 • 1 0 ‘ • 4 1 . 4 r , -4 1 -- • • •14 */ I V.tr; e77. 1;7 f • 061 4 , 120 'JI 94*- ~.. SATURDAY, JUNE 8, 1822. SOCIETY for the IMPROVEMENT of PRISON. DISCIPLINE, and for the REFORMA TION of JUVENILE OFFENDERS. PATRON—H. R. H. the Duke of GLOUCESTER, K. G. VICE-PRESIDENTS. Lord Nugent. Lord Althorpe. Right Hon. Charles Manners Sutton, M.P. Right Hon. William Sturges Bourne, M.P. Right flon. Sir G. IL Rose, Bart., M.P. Rt. Hon. J. C. Villiers, M.P. Hon. George Anson, M.P. Sir T. Dyke Acland Bt. M.P. Sir T. Baring, Bart. M.P. Sir James Mackintosh, M.P. Sir William Anson. T: W. Coke, Esq. M.P. Wm. Dickenson, Esq. M.P. T. G. Estcourt, Esq. M.P. T. F. Forster, Esq. W. H. Freemantle,Esq.M.P. Wm. Manning, Esq. James Scarlett, Esq. M.P. John Smith, Esq. M.P. Wm. Wilberforce, Esq. MP. Edward Bootle Wilbraham, Esq. M.P. Theh Duk e o f , B uc ki ng h am. E„. M arquis of Lansdown. t" r ' i y. ad o f Albemarle. arl of D artmouth. _ a I'l Harcourt. t;arl Hardw.ic k tar!. Grosvenor. earl e: o l lLiyerponl.' t n oss lyn. alrlff Harrowby. The Darnley. e Lord Bishop of ' Chi ! Lora Bishop of Chester. I:_w Lord Bishop of St. Asaph: „. 40 ° n1 Holland. rd DynevOT. Lord Gren ville. Lord _ Auckland. Lord Lured. Calthorpe. rct Rocksavage. 4011 Cli • 1 4 , Ne. Belglne. T reasurer—THOMAS FOWELL BUXTON, Esq. M.P. Ch airman of the Committee—SAstum. HOARE, jun. Esq. At the ANNIVERSARY MEETING of the SOCIETY, hel d at Freemasons' Hall, Great Queen-street, on Monday, the 3 4 June, 1822, his Royal Highness the Duke of GLOU CESTER, Patron, in the Chair, the following Resolutions -el. ? u nanimously agreed to i~llP aS moved by EDWARD BOOTLE WILBRAHAM, and seconded by THOMAS FOWELL BUXTON, Esq. been l3 t•--That a Report, founded on the Statement which . has 11 now read, be prepared and printed . . under the direction of Co mmittee. That this Meeting rejoices at the increasing at t eation and warm interest which the Improvement of Prison he'elphne continues to excite throughout the kingdom, and at Prearress of beneficial Plans in the reformationscontruction and ma agern ent of Gaols uniting the with the punish ment of the Offender. waa moved by Lord . SUFFIE LD, and seconded by the ''-aa HENRY GICEY BENNET, M.P. 2d. --That h as ,-- e oat this Meeting pr!tests against an opmion which h ar _n a been formed, that the; Views and Plans . of the Society tendency to deprive Punishment of its just terrors, and tender Prison a desirable habitation : . that this assertion is aeonsistent with rcascn, and at variance with truth, as the dia.. which it is the object of this Society to recommend, t r aPoses orthe . convicted hard labour, rigorous privation, and ttttal restraint. That a Gaol thus regulated can present no a ttraction s to the vicious, and experience proves . that the Cri dalinal subp . ct to such discipline regards Impris.onmenht it with t..., -re ad, while a Gaol of an opposite character carries witn t error to the guilty. It was moved by THOS. War. COKE, Esq. M.P. and s e . "tided by Lord NUGENT, M.P. 3 d.—That this Meeting highly approves of the Communica jr„_'°lls which the Society has made, with a view to . diffuse. with -41 atle g f its Plans in foreign countries. That it is wit I) . e emiar d-- a e e o lig• ht this Meeting learns t. tha . t owing to the indefa utgable exertions of the Petersburgh Filson Society, Auxiliary '4th -talons have been established in the Russian Empire, ex ietahog even to Siberia ; that in Berlin a Society is now form ,llgo for the amelioration of the Gaols in the Prussian domi af as im .that in France and Switzerland enlightened principles h a . cr mai jurisprudence prevail; that in Spain the subject warmly interested the .Mem ers the amending y am he Gaols in ae`,'"ogtlom • and that in Portugal a similar spirit . has been •i'llfested for Improvement of Prison Discipline. aba t was moved by WILLIAM WILBERFORCE, Esq. M.P. Seconded by the Earl of BLESINTON, ',,, th ,z-That this Meeting observes, with deep concern, the ah. 414- :"Qg increase of Juvenile Depredators in the Metropolis, of opini on th at t h e l a b our s of the Society cannot be more ' au f eil cially directed than to the means of checking an _evil g am,. h t consequences so fatal to the best interests of these Ar - o 4 PPY youths, and so injurious to the , peace, morals,..and f f' e rtY ' of the community. That the remporary Refuge ti°llPed. by this Society for the reformation of Boys, who, on s I ,Ar, dischar ge f rom P r i son , are desirous of abandoning their Y habits, highly merits the support of an enlightened pub th That th e success o f this Institution satisfactorily proves ro a a there are b ut f ew , even among the most guilty who and no t, not, a 4. proper d i sc i pl i ne and treatment, be subdued tha t h 'eclainled, and justifies the Meeting in the conviction, gr es ;•° measur e wou ld b e so efficacious in arresting the pro- D O fJuvenile delinquency, as the establishment of a well.' ilated Criminal °lath. prison for the correction and reformation of Wi r t w as moved by Lord CALTHORPE, and seconded by SA stt• Hoant, jun. Esq. and . --That the thanks of this Meeting are eminently due, - ki n ar e hereby presented, to the Magistracy throughout the Ih t}T 4)11 :1, for the readiness with which they have co-operated a t e Plans and objects of this Institution. Al.p w as moved sby STEPHEN LUSHINGTON, Esq. LL.D. ea a • a nd seconded by JOHN RANDOLPH, Esq. (of the Ame gt, onga ess ), Adaa That the Right Hon. Sir G. H. Rose, Bart. M.P. and ootle Wilbraham, Esq. M.P. be added to the Vice tiesideTsots of the Society. to ,1 40 3'al Highness having left the Chair, it was unani- Y°7a,-- resolved, on the motion of Lord SUFFIELD, to 7 hat the cordial thanks of this , Meeting be presented • tro " r "olral Highness the Duke of Gloucester, K.G. the Pa ed th ll ',,`°,r the kind interest with which he has uniformly promots this "hjects of the Society, and for the honour which . he ha . eee t paaY conferred on the Meeting, bypresiding over its pro 1, 1 7g5.. a,ha „' °hJect of this Institution is to extend those principles, 4 0 .. 1 P0 /tote those designs, to diffuse which the labours d of tee t :1 111 , and other eminent Philanthropists, have been 1- f0r7. 1 : The Society ascertains and recommends those plans heu""e regulation of P • s which experience has proyed Knealculated to inspire the Criminal with the dread of im ois k „ nr° ;h eota and to induce him, on his liberation, to . abandon tto t c"! , Y habits. The Society collects and transmits informa Prints and disperses useful publications, prepares such 4 3 a) , B , for the erection of new and alteration of old Prisons,. llgiouest adapted to ensure the classification, inspection, re the Cry i nstruction hard labour, and regular employment, of ' the c th- course of their visits to the Gaols in the Metropolis, th ° .'notittee very frequently meet wiah destitute boys, sy o, to ja eir charge from confinement, literally know not where the Y their heads. To assist such friendless outcasts has been tatiPractice of the Society, and to render this relief more effi has ar ° 4 ; they have established a Temporary Refe for sueh isPosed to abandon their vicious courses. Thisasylum horobeen i nstrumental in affording assistance to a considerahle us t °f distressed youths, who, but for this seasonable aid, ki ss i n aye resorted to criminal practices for support. On ad tal an 'T 'MO this establishment, the boys are instructed in mo * try, •"'Aigious duty, 'subjected to habits of order and Indus reaanal after a time, are placed in situations which afford a he r s oable prospect of th • becoming honest and useful Mem of ,their Society. aidelycitend.these objects, and to render its exertions _more Widely ene ficial, the Society solicits the aid of Public Bene fends e• Its expences are unavoidably serious, and their Shi m are at present very low ; but they trust that pecuniary the Yir 1 '1,91 not be withheld, when it is considered that on gt e at er amY with which this appeal is answered depends in a tio o o t p, t eas h ur.e.the success of the Society ' s objects—the reforma 14e vicious, and the prevention of crime. tmual Subscription of One Guinea, or a Donation of boa - Y m nstitates a member of this Society. 40 11 0v a tions alid Annual Subscriptions are• received by the It i r i e l e d t r i n d filan kers :—Barclay, Tritton, and Co. 54, Lombar,a turnmonds and Co. Charing-cross ; Frys and Co. St. _oett s , .„ j - conrt ; Goslings and Co. Fleet - street; Hoare, Bar uer "uu Co. Lombard street • d S ith Payne, and Smiths, lerilget-street, Ala nsion-house• an also m by:Mr. A. 0. Elliot, tury, ° the C orornittee, at the ' Society's Office, 18, Alderman- PUBLICATIONS. This Day was published, price Is., AREFUTATION of MR. GRINISHAWE'S PAMPHLET, entitled " The WRONGS of the CLER GY of the DIOCESE of PETERBOROUGH Stated and Il lustrated." In which is given a Correct Account of the Causes which have, called forth the Violent and Abusive Pamphlets against the Bishop of Peterborough, &c. &c. Printed for F. C. and J. Rivington, St. Paul's Church yard, and Waterloo-place, Pall-mall. - This Day were putilished, price 65.6 d. in boards, ILLUSTRATIVE REPLIES in the form .of ESSAYS to the. QUESTIONS proposed by the Right Reverend HERBERT MARSH, Lord Bishop of PETERBO ROUGH, to CANDIDATES for HOLY ORDERS : in which bis Lordship's Interrogations on Redemption, Original Sin, Free W4l, Justification, Everlastin4 Salvation, Predestina tion, Regeneration, Reniivation, and the Holy Trinity, are shewn to be constructed from the Holy Scriptures, and the Articles of the Church of England. ' Printed for F. C. and J. Rivin.Tton, St. Paul's Church Yard . ; and Waterloo Place, Pall Mall. This Day was published, • Handsomely printed on a fine paper, in One Volume, price in boards, ss. THE BOOK of PSALMS, in Verse; with a short explanatory Preface to each Psalm, taken from the 'Works of •lifferent Writers on the Psalms, but chiefly from Bishop Horne's Commentary. Sold by Rivingtons, Waterloo place, and St.. Paul's Church yard ; and Hatchard, Piccadilly. To be in, the MMUS, 7th JIIII. FOR CALCUTTA DIRECT, - ---- ---- - - THE Fine SflIP WOODFORD ) \ A 1, liurthen On Tons, lying in the East India Export Dock' ALFRED CHAPNIAN, .1 11\ ••.:-. 13 -..,...- Commander. ' , For Freight or Passage, apply to the Com mander, at the Jerusalem Collee-honse, or to JOHN CHAP MAN. and Co., 2, Leadenhall-Street. HORSE AND DOG MEDICINES, Prepared by T. WATSON. Druggist, Cambridge. II ESE MEDICINES have been for many years in the highest repute, and are sanctioned by most of the first Sporting Characters in the Kingdom, who have given the. Proprietor their testimony in writing :--, From his Majesty's Huntsman. Home Park, Windsor. bare made use of your Balls for the Distem per for several years past, and find them far preferable to any other Medicine I ever tried ; therefore will thank you to send : . me as many as you can for....note, and direct them to No. 10i, Holborn Hill, London, and they shall be paid Wt. on delivery. i I am, Sir, your humble Servant, • R. DAVIS, Huntsmen to , his Majesty's Harriers: s. d. I s. d. Diuretic Balls (i doz.) 3 0 Cordial Balls doz,) 3 0 Diuretic Balls ( t i doz.) . 3 6 Purging Balls for Horses I 4 Blistrrine: Ointment 3 0 Distem per,Balls for Dogs I 6 Kirby's Liquid Meter, in Bottles...ts.od.and Bs. Sold by Butlers, ~;hemists, No. 4, Cheapside, St. Paul's, and 220, Regent-street (near the Argyle Rooms), London; 40, WaterlOo-place,. Edinburgh; and 34, Sackville-street, Dublin ; and by the Principal Medicine-Venders throughout the United Kingdom. Purchasers are reqaested to ask far " Watson's Horse and Dog Medicines,". and to observe his name and address on the directions,.to preveptimpositions. • IDO W WELCH'SFEMALE PILLS v have obtained the sanction and approbation of Gen tlemen of the Medical Profession, as a- safe and valuable Medicine, in removing obstructions, and relieving other inconveniences to which the female frame is liable, especially those which at an , early period of life frequently arise from want of exercise, and general debility of the system: They create an appetite, correct indigestion, remove giddiness and nervous head ache, and are enkinently useful in windy dis orders, pains in the stomach, shortness of breath, and palpi tations of the heart. _ _ _ Purehagers are requested to remark, that, as a testimony of authenticity, each Bill of Directions is signed with the name of ~~~~ in writing Sold wholesale - and Retail,,in London, by Wright, No. 46, Fleet-street ; Barclay and Sons, Fleet Market ; New bery and Sons, St. Paul's Church Yard; Sutton and Co. Bow Church Yard ; Sanger, 350, Oxford-street, opposite Bond street; Evans and Son, Long Lane, Smithfield ; Johnston, Greek-street, Soho; Butler and Sons, Cheapside 1 Godfrey and Windis . , Bishopsgate-street : and by all Country Venders, at 2s. 9d per Box. * * *lt is necessary to inform the public that KEA RSLEY'S is the only original and genuine Medicine, and has been pre pared by them for more than thirty years. PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF LORDS, FRIDA", JUNE 7. The Earl of EGMONT took the oaths and his seats. Mr. TOMLYNS, from the Bank, presented Returns of the quantity of Bullion issued by the Governor and Company to the Treasury from 1820 to the present time.—Laid on the table. - ' _ _ . Mr. In.vma, from the Custom-house, presented an Account of the quantity of Foreign Grain imported and warehoused in this country.—Laid on the table. Lord CLIFDEN presented Petitions from the Manufac turers and Retail Dealers in• the Spirit Trade, of the City of lVaterford, Kilkenny, Carlow. and Callon, praying for pro tection against the practice of illicit Distillation.—Laid on the table. _ _ _ . The Doyle Divorce Bill was read a third time and passed. The Archbishop of YORK presented a Petition from the Archdeacon and Clergy of York, against the catholic Peers Bill:—Laid on the table. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE moved for returns of the expences incurred by the Commissioners for examining. Public Records in Ireland since the year 1820.—Ordeied. Mr. STUART WORTLEY, and others, brought up from the Comm Ons several private Bills, which were read a first time. VAGRANTS. The Vagrant Laws Amendment Bill welt through a Corn.. mittee, and the Report was ordered to be received on Monday next. CATHOLIC PEERS. The Duke of NEWCASTLE held a Petitionfrom the Inha. titants of the town and neighbourhood of Mansfield, in ihe county of Nottingham, against a Bill pending in their Lord ships House for granting peculiar favours to Catholic Pears in violation of the Constitution. In the course of a few days that petition had been signed by 1250 persons. Hetrusted, there fore, that the eyes of the country were opened, alai he believed that the chief part of the empire viewed with terror the passing of such a Bill by one branch of the Legislature. In his part of the country be could say that hostility to . tie Bill was In creasing, and would increase, which must be tie case against a measure which he could, and the nation would, soon call by no other name than that of odious. It was a till more insi dious and more full of danger than any which had been passed since the times of Charles the Second. He trusted that, in re jecting it', their Lordships would give a fresh proof of their wisdom. The discussion having unexpectedly been postponed, he feared it would not be in his power to attend then it should take place, as domestic circumstances might prevent him. JA this were the case, he should feel deeply morteied, as it was' not only a sense of duty, but inclination which nade him con sider it necessary to oppose such a Bill. Lard HOLLAND did not rise to object to thepetition, which he regarded as one which it was very proper for their LordshipS to receive. Still less did he mean to anticipate the discussion on the measure against which the petition was directed; for, though their Lordships should not have the benefit of the Noble Duke's attendance, he was convinced that, whether that Noble Duke should be present at the time, or should avail himself of his Parliamentary privilege, to give his vote, his opinion on the subject would be equally unchanged. But he objected to the manner in which the Noble Duke had describ ed the Bill, as one for granting peculiar favours to Catholic Peers in violation of the Constitution. Let the Noble Lord read the Bill and he would see that it was not one to grant fa vours in violation of the Constitution, but one to restore the ancient Constitution of the country and of that House. In saying that he meant to express no opinion as to the propriety of passing the measure; but he could not suffer so erroneous a description to be sent forth to the world by an individual of rank and influence, whose opinion must certainly be looked to by the uninformed on the subject. The Bill on the table must rest on its own merits. Some doubted whether the period were come for passing such a measure, others objected to the mea sure altogether, but nothing but the grossest ignorance could maintain that if the Bill did pass, it would not render the Con stitution more analogous to what it was in former times. lle ,also assured the Noble Duke that lie knew something of the public opinion in that part of the country frofh which the Pe tition had come, and that it was by no means so general against the Billyas the Noble DukeAupposed: And;' if much exas peration had prevailed on the subject, it would have still more become the Noble Duke to be correct In what he stated, and not to give a description which was totally inapplicable to the measure. The Petition having then been received; and laid on the table, The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented similar Petitions from the Borough of Newark-upon-Trent, the ToWns of East Redford and Tuckford, the Parish of Sutton and Ashley, and froiu the Inhabitants of Nottingham. The last had been signed in two days by 1825 individuals. Read and laid on the table. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE gave noticei - that on Mon day next he should'move the second reading of the Bill for the more effective punishment of Manslaughter. CHURCH DISCIPLINE. Lord DACRE rose pursuant to notice to present a petition which he had received, and should submit to their Lordships with reluctance, as it bore personally on one individual whom Ile sincerely respected for his high character and attainments. He should not have done his duty, however, if he had not ac cepted the task ; the more especially as the petition com plained of a practice which savoured in some degree of seve rity, He should first move that the petition be read ; then. that it do lie upon the table, and if this were agreed to, he should then propose to address the Crown. Their Lordships were not ignorant of the subject, as it had come before them last year, and had he been satisfied by the answer then given, that the Right Reverend Prelate whose conduct was - arraigned had acted in conformity. with the law of the land, and that of the Church, he could assure him that he would not have brought the present petition forward. But since that time the peti tioner stated that the Right Reverend Prelate had added to the 87 questions which he then proposed, 30 more on one single point• ,of doctrine, whereas the Thirty-nine Articles should be the only standard of the doctrines of the Church. He should not however now enter into the - matters of fact which the petition contained, but should only move that it be read. The petition was then read. It was from Thomas Shuttle worth Grimshaw, Clerk, Master of Arts and Rector of Burton Latimer, and complained of the Bishop -of Peterborough's re fusal to license in his Diocese, unless 87 questions which he put to Candidates were answered to his satisfaction: It then prayed their Lordships to address the King to enforce the De claration at the head of the Liturgy. The petition having been read. Lord DACRE stated that he held another to the same effect from another individual. The ground of complaint in both was the nature of the examination to which Candidates, for Holy Orders or for Curacies were subjected by the course adopted by the Right Rev. Prelate. Hie then -*ad a letter from a Mr. Thurtell, who said that he had considered the 87 questions most attentively, and answered them most con scientiously, and that some of them 'being of iernost deli cate nature, lie had subjoined an Appendix to his answer, with the authorities on which it was founded. In reply to this the Right Rev. Prelate-had written a letter in which he stated that the object of this examination was to ascertain the re ligious principles of the Candidate, that he might know whether they were founded on the doctrines of the Church ; that he only wanted plain and short answers, instead of which Mr. Thur tell had sent him a mass of disquisitions which prevented his own opinion from being seen, and that he sent him ' another copy of his questions, to which he should return precise answers, and that as the mode of examination de pended entirely on his own discretion; he should inform Mi. Thurtell before-hand, that if he did not choose to conform- , to it; he should not be licenses). Now' he contended that admitting the right of the Reverend prelate to examine and to choose the mode of-his examination, still he was bound by the common statute and the canon law to confine himself within certain limits. It had been the common practice'and courtesy when a person removed from another Diocese, to admit the validity of the testimonial which he presented, signed by his Rector and countersigned by the Bishop. As the Rev. Pre late acknowledged no such courtesy, he would allow that he possessed the right of examination, but that by the Thirteenth of Elizabeth, and by the Thirty-fourth Canon, he was limited in his examination to these points, whether a person could' explain in Latin, and account for his belief according to the Articles of the Church. If these Articles had been so drawn up by those who had prepared them, as to embrace a larger latitude than one particular sect, then persons might ac count for their faith according to them, in more than/one parti cular mode. This, he contended, was the end for which they had been framed, and he supported his opinion' by quotations from Bishop Burnet and Fuller's History, and by the later authorities of the Bishop of Bangor and of Bishop Horsley. He also maintained that the Royal Declaration which pre ceded the Liturgy was intended to show that men of different opinions might meet within the pale of the Thirty-nine Are tides, all of them taking them to be for, them. He com plained that the Eighty-seven Questions proposed by the Re verend Prelate were not an examination, but a test, which must be gone through before he would admit of examination. The Royal Declaration wished all " curious questions" to be laid aside, but many of the Rev. Prelate's questions were of the most metaphysical order. If they were identical with the Thirty-nine articles, then they were superfluous ; and if they were not co-extensive with all those articles, they were in Op position to the Statute and Canon Laws. The Rev. Prelate might say, that this was not the proper place for discussing such questions, but if he denied their Lordships' authority, in what situation were they placed? Would it not be possible that every. Bishop should have articles of his own, and would men undertake tne cure of souls, if they were to be tried by different tests in every Diocese, and be exposed to such severe proceedings ? Would their Lordships remain passive, when such a practice might become 'generalized, and , the country might be filled with Bishops with articles in their hands, and by Ministers inquiring in what Diocese they might profess ? Would not this be recruiting for Dissenters ? Such a prac tice would give them a complete triumph. Here would be an Episcopal Establishment with a dissenting popula tion. He hoped their Lordships would concur with him in the opinion that some remedy should be provided for such an evil. It was always supposed that there was no wrong with ' out a remedy, and the Crown had power to grant one. It might direct a Convocation to be called. So soon, therefore, as the Petition should be laid On the table, he should move an Address to the Crown praying his Majesty to institute an in quiry to ascertain whether any innovations had taken place in Church Discipline likely to produce mischievous conse quences. At the same time he had too much respect for the character of the Right Reverend Prelate not to attribute the course which be, had adopted to over-zeal, which would pro dube effects totally different from those which he contemplated. The Noble Lord concluded by moving that the Petition do lie upon the table. The Bishop of PETERBOROUGH would begin by mak ing some remarks on the speech of the Noble Lord, and would then go through the allegations of the Petition, On which all Petitions must stand or fall. The Noble Lord had infornied ,the House of the case which had given rise to the petition, but it ''ad been stippresseed by the Petitioner. The right of exa n ation was given to Bishops by the 48th canon, which or dered that no curate should be admitted, except after having been examined by the Bishop of the diocese. Had not every Bishop then also the right of choosing a mode of examine ! tion ? The questions which he proposed Were not a test, but an essential part of his examination. He compared the SUN. answers with the Liturgy and the Articles, which were there fore the only tests to which candidates were submitted. Had he not the right of selecting his mode of examination in his own diocese ? If their Lordships interfered in his case, they must interfere also in other dioceses, for he was not the only Bishop who examined by questions and answers. And then every disappointed candidate for Holy Orders would send Pe. titions like the present to the House. The Right Reverend Prelate then stated that the Petitioner, instead of returning plain answers to the question put to him, had defeated their object by the multiplicity and length of his explanations. He had sent ten folid pages of the largest dimension and closely written. This was both an artifice and an insult, and he would have acted mere honourably if he had refused at once to give au answer at all. Having waded through this mass of matter, he '(the Bishop of Peterborough) had found that the whole was collected to conceal the opinion of the Petitioner.— He had sent him another paper, desiring to have precise answers, but the Petitioner had replied that he could only , answer as he had done, and that if more explanations were wanted, he was ready to send them. How then could he (the Bishop of Peterborough) conscientiously declare that a man professed sound doctrine, when he could not ascertain what were his religious opinions ? It had been hinted that he paid no attention to the testimonials brought from other dioceses ; but those testimonials were generally to moral character, with an opinion that the person was orthodox. Now there were so many opinions with respect to orthodoxy, that an exami nation alone could settle the point. Besides, the Bishop of the Diocese, when lie countersigned those testimonials, only bore witness to the honesty of the subscriber, not to the cha racter or doctrine of the candidate. The everend Prelate then read the various allegations of the Petition, and declared that it was false, that be had peremptorily required answers to every one of his questions. It was false that he had ever re jected individuals, even if they had deviated from his own in terpretation, not only in one, but even in six or seven answers on points on which controversy might fairly exist. He had never refused a license, except when the opinions expressed were in direct contradiction to the doCtrines of the Church. It was also false that he had added 36 questions to the original 87. He had not added, but substituted those 36 for the 87, in cases of examination for Curates • in those for Ordination he had made no alteration. The Petitioner wished to recognize no other standard of doctrine than the 39 Articles ; but he con tended that the Liturgy formed part of the test to which it was necessary to subscribe. Every candidate was required by the Canon to give account of his faith according to the Articles of Religion. But could he do so by the mere act of putting his name to those Articles ? Would not that be nugatory ? The Canon warranted examination, and examination warranted his questions. The Articles without being interpreted said nothing , : It was interpretation which prhvented them from being -a dead letter. In the answers returned to his question, he had some times found, the Articles, made to express the very reverse of their real Meaning. Was it his duty in these cases to grant ordination or licences ? - Yet in the course of five years, the number of persons- to whom he had refused either, did not - amount to more than three. The Royal Declaration at the head of the Liturgy had given as much offence at the time to the adirersaries of Archbishop Law, as this question had dorie to his opponents. Ad Address had then .been presented. to. the King, as one was now proposed, and if. - the same party prevailed, in the present day as in the time of Charles the First, the Bishop of Peterborough might undergo the same fate as Archbishop Law. The Petitioner prayed their Lordships to address his Majesty to enforce the Royal Declaration, but that Declaration was issued to insure the grammatical explanation of the Articles, and that was what his questions were intended to do. Should his Ma jesty issue his mandate to forbid the use of those questions, he should bow in submission ; but it would become their Lord ships, before they agreed to an Address calling for such an ex ercise of the Royal Prerogative, to consider whether it would be consistent with the Constitution of Church and State. He therefore trosted that their Lordships would not think it ne cessary to concur with the prayer of a Petition founded in fallacy and falsehood. Of this he was, convinced the Noble Lord was not aware, when he Yielded to the solicitations of the !Petitioner to present it to time House. Whatever might be their Lordships' decision, he could have no personal interest in the matter, and he was only anxious to retain the use Of his questions, because the experience of five years had satisfied him of their utility. He now stood a second time in his own justi fication, though it was not usual to be tried twice for the same offence, and it was not very :teeming that an individual who des dieated his life to the defence of Christianity, should be twice put upon his own. He now should leave his case in the hands of their Lordships. Lord HOLLAND conceived that the Reverend Prelate had used harsh language towards the Petitioner. For though he was a man of learning and a Prelate, he had not the power, of reading hearts and knowing the motives of men. After hav ing attentively listened to the Reverend Prelate's speech, he must say, that the whole tenour of it displayed the most corn- , plete ignorantia elenchi that he had ever witnessed in a public i man or a public body. The question was, whether the prin. ciple of examination- was justified by the law of the land, and he held, according to sound constitutional doctrine, that if a remedy were not found in the Church or the Law, it must be found in Parliament. The Reverend Prelate said, that his questions were not tests, but a mode of examination ; but this was a miserable subterfuge, and-the Rev. Prelate was surely too manly not to own that his object was to find out the reli gious opinions of individuals. As to the canon law being bind ing on Ecclesiastics, he doubted-whether it might be considered as the law of the land, not having received the same sanction as the 39 Articles and the Liturgy. The only ground on which the Rev. Prelate was able to stand was the 48th canon, and even that was ambiguous. The 39 Articles, as they at present stood . by law established, were put in their present shape at the commencement of the reign of Q. Elizabeth, in 1562. Would the Learned and Rev. Prelate deny that, from the time of Lu alter, from the time of the Reformation itself, the principles of Arminianism were not unknown to the Church ? Would any man believe such a thing, or if he did, would he venture to as sert it ? If these questioni had been proposed, since the fram ing/of the Articles, to many of the greatest ornaments of the Church, would they not have given such answers as would have excluded them from the Church, if such a system had pre vailed ? The' tendency of the system was to narrow the basis of the Church—a most dangerous policy in whomsoever might pursue it. The Articles had always since the time of Charles 11. been considered as articles of peace rather than of uni, formity. The object or polidy of them had been, in the lan guage of their historian, to preserve a discreet laxity. That good and learned person, Archbishop Wake, said, that it had always been the practice, and, he trusted in God, that more would never be required from the candidates for the Church, than a subscription to these articles. Now the Learned and Rev. Prelate opposite must either use all the harsh and unchaS ritable language to that great person, as he had applied to the Petitioner, or else be inconsistent with himself. He did not mean to put articles of examination to the Bench of Bishops ; but he believed that if any such course were taken, it would be found that great diversity of opinion existed. He had heard that persons who had been refused in the diocese of Peterbo rough, had gone to a diocese where they had been known, and were ordained. He protested ag'ainst the cruel practice of examining Curates upon the Articles. If a man after long de liberation with himself, resolved upon entering the Church of England, or any Church, it was most cruel and impolitic in that Church 'to reject him. He must say that in his opinion the Bishop of Peterborough had very much exceeded his legal authority in putting his Eighty-seven Questions upon the Thirty-nine Articles. At all events, if he had not exceeded his authority, he had exercised it in a novel, and, to the interests of the Church, detrimental manner. As far as the Church Establishment formed part of the laws of the land, it was their duty to maintain the peace thereof; and to prevent the spec tacle of one diocese being set against another, they ought to put a stop to this growing evil in the Church. The Learned and Rev. Lord had avowed in that . House what no one had ventured to do since the Revolution, viz. a desire to straiten and narrow the basis of the Church. He hoped that House would interfere and widen that basis as much as possible, con sistently with their duty to God and the interests of the Church. The Learned and Reverend Prelate talked about Convocation. It was a very pretty thing to read about in books, but he hoped he,should never see that power put in operation in the present day. Lord CALTHORP thought that though there ins a discre tion Vested in the Bishops, the Right Reverend Prelate had gone beyond the limits of any discretion that could possibly have been conceived to attach to the 48th Canon, and also in violation of the King's Declaration affixed to the 39 Articles. That Declaration was to forbid the dictission - of nice and cu rious questions, such as those put by the Right Rev. Prelate.— He asked whether it was to be' tolerated in, a country like this, that individuals, who by their learning and attainments would PRlcl SEVENPENCE. 'do credit to any Profession, should be excluded from carrying those qualities to the Church ? He gaveitill credit to the Right Rev. Prelate for that extraordinary -zAT'' for the Established' Church, which, although disguised, he really believed actuated him in this proceeding. But he must declare it as his Solemn opiniOn, that the course pursued by him had 'a direct ternittnc7 to create schisms in the Church, and 'he hoped • therefore it would be put a stop to before its 'evils becaine felt. He hoped' the House would vote for the petitidu, 'as implying a censure upon a practice which since the establigliment of the Reformed• • Church to this period had never before preVailed: - • The Earl of HARROWBY said, that as he thOught differ ently now from.what he did when the last Petition was *pre , sented, he would trouble their Lord4iips -with an explanation' of the vote he should give. From the seriousness c& the alle. gations, and the-repetition of thein, 'he thouight the Petitioner was entitled to come before the House,' and he thought that House was bound to give more attention to the Petition. On the question which the Petition involved, he ConfeSsed that he: was disposed to agree in Almost all that he had heard from 'the other side, but he made a reserve on scone points. The De.. claration alluded to set forth that the candidate for Hblv Orders, " shall give an account of his faith, according to the articles, and his concurring with the.same shall be sufficzezit testimony." The practice of the Right' Rev: Prelate be thought' was eminently prejudicial and dangerous to the Church. To narrow the foundations of the Church was not the mode to pro.. mote its interests. The practice was doubtful in point of lali; and clearly wrong in point of policy. HO, should vote for the Petition being laid on the table, .though he was far from pledg , ing hiniself to'support an address which he had not heard read.. The LORD CHANCELLOR' thought it would be a most extraordinary course for their Lordships to take, to refuse to . allow the petition to lie on the table, and yet not to, reject it; but permit it to be read. If the Noble Earl who had spoken . last saw nothing in this petition which made it improper toile received, or to be allowed to lie upon the table (taking it to be a general representation of the sentiments entertained by 'the gentlemen who had signed it), it appeared •to him (the Lord Chancellor) that it ought to be permitted so to be read laid on the table, whether their Lordships should choose to found any ulterior measure upon it or not. And such -a - pro position he was himself inclined, -therefore, to support. But if it was intended, by laying the petition on their table, to imply . any censure on the Right Reverend Prelate, whose conduct it called in question, he (the Lord Chancellor) would vote against it,-even in that stage of the auestion. 'He could not see how the Right Reverend Prelate, indeed, could go on t 6 the subscription, without previous examination. In voting that the petition should lie on the table, he (the Lord Chan , cellor) desired not to be understood as imputing any blarrie s tO. the Right Reverend Prelate. • The petition was then read, and ordered to lie on the, table. Lord DACRE then observed, he had intended to have follow ed up the last motion, by moving an address to the Crown on that subject z but from what the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, and other Learned Lords, had said, it was clear that he (Lord Dacre) should find much difficulty and opposi tion if he persevered in his intention. He was therefore ed to substitute for it a Motion " that this petition be referred to a Committee to consider the matter thereof." ... _ The LORD CHANCELLOR having explained the terms on which he would consent that the petition be laid on the table, Would only say that he could not consent to this'motion. ' The question being put, The Earl of CARNARVON could not repress his astonish ment on finding, that when so important a subject as•this was brought before the House, the bench of Right Reverend Prelates had not declared in words—:no, nor by a nod—nor even by a gesture, whether they meant; to a . man, to sane , . tion or conderrm the conduct of their Right Rev. Brother.— (Hear, and a; laugh.)—Usually those Reverend Prelates were not backward in expressing their opinions on subjects comparatively unimportant. They had long been in the habit of attending, and very regularly, the discussions of their Lord ships ; but whether for mere ornament and appearance, or for any more useful purpose, their conduct on this evening might possibly decide.' Could their Loidships see with indiffeience a bench of Bishops thus sitting in timid silence? Was it pct almost a desertion of those whom it was the bounden duty of those Right Rev. Prelates to instruct.? On any great con!ti.• tutional question, particularly a year or two ago, they formerly could not complain that either the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, or those Right Reverend Prelate, were slow to give the. House the benefit of their wisdoM and experience. ' But here, on a tiue.stion of Church policy, both were silent. 'That the Right Reverend Prelates had come down to vote one way or other, was evident enough ; but the grounds upon which their votes *ere to proceed their Lordships were not to learn. What would the public think, when it was informed that of the very many Reverend Prelates who had come down tbat night to the House, not one was to be found who had a single Word to offer upon ie subject before their Lordships ?—(Hear.) On the question that the Petition be referred to a Committee, the House divided— Contents - 19 Non Contents - 58 Majority - - - —=39. MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL. • After a few words in conversation from Lord ELlenborougt., the Earl of Liverpool, and the Lord Chancellor, this Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Wed nesday. Their Lordships adjourned at a little after Nine o'Clock. DOUSE OF COMMONS. MISCELLANEOUS. - - Mr. BLACKBURNE presented several petitions from Brewers and Publicans in Lancashire, against the Licensing Bill. - , - • Mr. M. A. TAVLOIi postponed his motion relative to the practice of the Court of Chancery until the 25th inst. Mr. EGERTON presented a petition froirt certain Publicans in the county of Chester, against the Licensing Bill. Mr. BERNAL took this opportunity of stating, that solve observations which.had fallen from him on a former evening, with reference to the Licensing Bill, had been misrepresented in some public journals. He had been made to say that he thought no abuses existed in the mode of licensing country public houses. Now all that he in fact said was, that no dis tinction should be made between the London and the country brewers. Sir U. BURGH presented a petition from certain farmers of the county of Carlow, in Ireland, praying for the imposition of additional duties on imported butter. The Middlesex County Rates Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Bakers' Regulation Bill was recommitted, to afford an opportunity for introducing some amendments which were agreed to, and the Report was ordered to be received on Monday. Mr. BENETT presented a petition from the Tanneriof Salisbury, praying for the. total repeal of the Leather Tax. Lord G. BERESFORD presented a Petition from certain Owners and Occupiers of Land in the County of Waterford, praying for the imposition of additional Duties on . imported Butter. Mr. CALCHAFT, seing the Attorney-General in his place, complained that an Order of the House for a return of the num ber of causes set 'down for hearing in the scvcral branches of the Court of Chancery had not been fully complied with, inasmuch as in the papers which had been laid before.the House no re ference was made to the rolls. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he would inquire into the cause of the omission, and endeavour to have it sup plied. Mr: ABERCROMBY thought that some explanation ougl.t to be given by the officers of the rolls upon the subject. ' Mr. M. A. TAYLOR said a few words to the same effect, and complained of general neglect to the erdus of House on the part of officers of the Court of Chancery. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said a few words in reply. Here the conversation dropped. 'Mr. BEAUMONT presented a petition from the owners and occupiers of land in a district of. Northumberland, complaining of certain grievances which tiny had sustained under the horse tax.—Laid en the table. Sir T. ACLAND presented two petitions from the owners and occupiers of land in the hundreds of Axminster and Col lumpton, Devonshire, complaihing of agricultural distress.— Laid on the table. . - YORKSHIRE POLLS BILL. Mr. WYNN moved the second reading of the Yorkshire Polls Regulation Bill. Mr. CHALONER opposed the Bill. It 1M supported, he said, by no interest in the county of York ; and certainly if the county were polled, he did not think there was any one to whom they would less willingly intrust nay measure affect ing them than the Member for the County of Montonery, rhe teo e tl3' Jo ° dele EY7 i'l Pl'C'C' Si r