The Sun. — London, England, 1840-02-12 00:00:00

to submit to tint condition. All they w ---7 1s . lier1 wee to be alone, and they did not wish to interfere with Ecclesiastical - Sffairs. He bad taken the suggestion iron an article that recently appeared in the Edin- Azitgh Review, in the October number. The Hon. Gen tleman then read an extract from that periodical, which suggested that, as a remedy to the existing, evils, ves tries should be attended by no persons who were not members ; that the Established Church should defray •tsown expenses by means of those of its own comme t and that, if Dissenters appeared there, they should be subject to the tax. Disgraceful scenes had occurred in vestries. At Margate, in October last, all the town Lad been thrown into commotion by a vestry to make a Church-rate. Was this the way in which the Chur c h should be supported? The Este bli3hed Church certainly could not be injured by Dis -enters ceasing to contribute to the Church-rates. The English Church was the richestin the word of Christian Churches. The consciences of Dissenters should not be ridiculed on this point. Believing this measure founded on justice, he now moved for leave to bring in the Bill. Mr. GILLON seconded the motion, impelled, he said, by the horror be felt at the atrocities which had been practised on this Dissenter for refusing to pay a small Church-rate, to support a Church but half a de gree removed from Popery. —(" Hear," from Mr. O'Connell.) He trusted that this measure would be persisted in by his Hon. Friend. Lord J. RUSSELL said, he thought the case of John Thorogood hardly merited the characteristics which had been attributed to it by the Hon. Gentleman.— (Hear, hear, bear.) It appeared, from the petition of John Thorogood himself, that having been summoned to appear before the Ecclesiastical Court, he had refused to appear. Now, though he (Lord John Russell) might regret that any person should incur imprisonment through his objecting .to appear before any Court, still he could not think that Parliament was bound to pay attention to such objections, and to admit that every individual was entitled to say before which Court he would, or would not, appear, however thct trust might be established by the law and the Constitution of the country.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear, hear.") Whatever might be the grievance of Church-rates or the general policy of the country respecting them, be did not think that Parliament could be called on to give Mr. Thorogood a remedy because he suffered imprison ment for thirteen months. The petitioner stated that he wa3 charged with no moral crime, and that the only allegation against him was that he did not obey the summons of the Court ; but he (Lord John Russell) thought that if the House was prepared to do away with those Courts, their authority should be maintained, and their summonses were not to be neglected.—( Hear.) John Thorogood was as much bound to obey those sum monses as any other of her Majesty's subjects.—(Hear.) No doubt he was impelled by conscientious motives to arrest the principle of voluntary payments and to oppose the principle of an Established Church. He stated in his petition that there ought not to be a State religion, and that the principle of an Established Church was unjust and inconsistent with the Scriptures. But so long as an Established Church was maintained by the law of the land, that law should be obeyed even it it were not founded on the b,st principle, and no individual was at liberty to disobey it. But he (Lord John Russell) thought that law was fosinded on just, and wise, and Scriptural principles, and he therefore did not subscribe to the petitioner's theoretical opinions— but even if he did he could not admit that any indivi dual was at liberty to decide what laws ha should obey or disobey, without any penalty whatever.—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord J. Russell) was of opinion that Church -rates, as they at present existed, were a most unnecessary and vexatious cause of dissension— (Cheers)—and to remove that would be a great be nefit to the Church and to the religious harmony of the country. It was with that eiew that he had more than once assisted in proposing measures to remove the grievance. One proposal was at once to abolish Church rates, and to transfer the burthen to the estates of the Church—that was objected to on the part of the Dis senters, who showed that if the law were passed they would endeaiour to get rid of it by the same system which they employed against the existing law— so that the same contest would be carried on, but on new grounds. Another proposal had been introduced by his Noble Friend (Lord Monteagle) when Chancellor of the Exchequer, who showed that the Church lands, if properly managed, would be suffi cient to defray the expenses to which Church-rates were applied. But that measure was objected to by the Church, both in that House and in the country, so strongly that it mlght have been impossible to carry it into effect. Those two measures having failed—one of which he thought most reasonable—the jealousy be tween the Church and the Dissenters continued. In deed he believed that jealousy was not confined to the subject of Church -rates, but prevailed to a great ex tent on other questions also ; and it•would be difficult to propose any measure to which the Dissenters would not object that it was too favourable to the Church, or the Church say, on the other hand, that too much was conceded to the Dissenters. He came now to the plan which had been proposed for the consideration of the House. The measure of the Hon. Member for Fins bury was one by which that portion of the people who conscientiously differed from the doctrines of the Estab lished Church were to be relieved from the payment of Church-rates. It was proposed that, in order to ascer tain who were the individuals to be thus exempted, from the payment, a declaration of disseut should be made. He should say that such a measure appeared to him very unsatisfactory. In the first place the de claration in question afforded a temptation to dissent from the Established Church, by giving a peculiar be nefit to those who should have made it. It was, how . ever, obvious, that that was a plan which held out a snare to conscience by holding out certain advantages to those who should agree to a certain declaration. It is said that those who arc members of the Established Church must pay ratesfor the maintenance of the establish ments of that Church, but those who did not belong to it, by making a declaration to that effect, were to be free from such a payment. This he thought would lead to evil consequences. There might be a man, for in stance, who should be a lukewarm and almost indiffe rent member of the Established Church ; and what would the proposed measure suggest to him ? It would tell him that Dissenters were exempt from the pyment of Church-rates, and he had immediately a temptation, and a bribe as it were, to the amount of the sum for which he should be liable, to declare himself conscien tiously opposed to the rights and doctrines of the Church.—( Hear, hear, hear, from Mr. Home.) The Hon- Member for Kilkenny might bring forward some measure in favour of the petition that had been prescribed, but he thought that there were many obe ;ections to the course proposed to be adopted. He should be sorry to see the time when those who professed the doctrines of the Church were obliged to look to volun tary support. He must therefore disagree with the petition that had been presented, and with the motion that had been introduced by the Hon. Member. He was prepared to go as far as any man, but he could not go to the extent asked for in the petition. As at pre sent advised, however, seeing the diff i culties that must arise, all that he (Lord Joi)) wes prepared to do, was to provide, by some measure, that the remedy for the nonpayment of Church-rates should not be by a sum mons to the Ecclesiastical Courts, but should be left to the Ciril Court, being wholly a civil de mand.—(Hear, hear, hear.) And secondly, that the penalty for non-payment should not be against the per son, but against the goods of the party.—(liear, hear.) As to the measure proposed by the Hon. Member for Finsl;ury, he altogether objected to it. Mr. HUME was sorry to hear the decision of the Noble Lord. Admitting the cause of the perpetual dissensions and irritation against the Church, the Noble Lord yet refused to temove the origin of that cause. Did the Noble L or d deny that Church-rates were cruelly unjust ?—',Hear, hear, from Lord John.) Why then did the Noble Lord concur with Lord Althorp in bringing forward a Bill to abolish them ? He wished the Noble Lord to grapple with the principle. Did- the Noble L or d mean to state that the Church of England, wh en th e C hurch Establishment was formed, was the same as i t i s now 9 Didthe i Nobl e L or d be lieve that the p eop l e o f England, onehalf of wh om were Dissenters, wo u ld perm i t their and their person s i mpr i soned for taxes property to be se i ze d, maintain the fabric of the Church, so amp l y and so liberallyo theendowed as it was ? John Thorogood m i ght not,in opinion of the Noble Lord, be entitled to sympathy, (Mr. Hume) would tell th e N o bl e Lordlhat t h h e e had the sympathy of millions out of that House. The Noble Lord was sufficiently acqua i nted with his tory to know that some persons had always set them selves up in opposition to had laws, and they had been martyrs in all causes. What relief did the Noble Lord propose in these times, when infidel opinions were likely to overwhelm the religious institutions? Why, he proposed to change the law by giving power to adopt a civil process. Did he suppose the people of England would permit such proceedings to go on (Hear, hear.) Was Mr. Thorogood the only man doubting the law, and the institutions? What were the clergy in Scotland now doing? Why laughing at the House of Lords, and stating that they looked only to the Scripture as their guide.—(Hear, beer.) If the Noble Lord wished to preserve the peace of the country, let him re-introduce the measure for providing the support of the Church, out of the rich funds of the THE SUN. LONDON, T UES D AY, FEBR IT APi jl. 1 40. THE STJN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, Ecclesiastical Court. He held in his hand the - thicree of the Right Hon. Genders - I.in himself, stating that John Thorogood had been cited to that Court by others.—( Hear, hear.) The Right lion. Gentleman had also stated that no rational man would support so crude and ill digested a measure es that which he (Mr.D.) bad proposed. That certainly was but a very poor compliment to himself, but he could tell the Right Hon. Gentleman and the House that the same measure bad received the sanction and approbation of the most en lightened of the Dissenters.—( Hear. hear.) But the House had it-elf last year passed a resolution in prin ciple the same as the Bill be now proposed, and he therefore tt usted the House would not stultify itself by rejecting his motion. The Hous3 then divided, when there appeared— For the motion e2 Against it _ _ . Majority against the motion ... ---55 COURT OF SESSION (SCOTLAND). Mr. WALLACE rose to move for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the administra tion of the law in the Supreme Court of Session in Scotian], with a view to ascertain whether the number of the Judges might not be diminished. It appeared from the returns that five Judges in the Outer House, as it was called by his countrymen, had, in 1831, 1,956 Causes before them, and is 1838 only 1,486 causes, Showing a diminution of nearly 25 per cent. By the last return it appeared that the number of causes enrolled before Lord Moncrieff, last year, was only 216, whilst Lord Cunniughame, in the same period, had more thou doubled the number. In what was called the Inner House, eight Judges, sitting in the two Courts of Review, in 1831, decided 495 causes, whereas the same number of Judges in the same Court decided only 238 causes in 1839. Those 'Courts had more than six months'vacation, and in the case of Mr. Jones, which he mentioned last year, and which was spread over a period of 41 months, the Court sat but 16 months. The duty had been for the last year effi ciently discharged to the satisfaction of the profession and the suitors, in the absence of two of the Judges, and a third was rendered by his age incapable of de voting much attention to the business of his Court. Having no desire to do anything that could be offensive to those Learned Lords, he was twilling to leave the inquiry in the hands of the Government, if the Noble Lord who was the leader of that House would undertake the appointment of the Committee, for he was satisfied that the result of the inquiry would in that case be satisfactory to the aountry. Mr. FOX MAULE said that it was not the inten tion of the Government to offer any opposition to the motion. As the House last Session had given an in crease of salary to the Scotch Judges, it was bound to inquire into the complaints which were very generally made as to the manner in which justice was adminis tered in Scotland. It was desirable to ascertain whether the number of Judges was greater then the business of their Courts required. But he believed that the Com mittee would have to inquire into other matters respect ing which there was considerable dissatisfaction. He begged to suggest to the Hon. Member for Greenock to leave the selection of the Gentlemen who should form the Committee to him, and he would take care to name such Members from both sides as would give the Judges and the country a perfect confidence in their impartiality. Sir GEORGE CLERK could not give a silent vote upon this question. In opposing, similar motions upon former occasions, he had been satisfied with leav ing the House to decide upon the arguments of her Majesty's Government. When this motion was last brougut forward, it was only supported .by the Hon. Member for Kilkenny and the Hon. Member for For far, and it was opposed by the Attorney-General and the Lord Advocate. There could not be a greater triumph given to the gentlemen who opposed the Bill for increasing the salary of the Judges, than the appoint ment of this Committee. He did not think a Committee was a proper mode of inquiry. The whole subject had been inquired into before a Commission, which had reported, and that Report had been adopted. Five years had not elapsed in Scotland without a most important alteration in the administration of justice in that country. The Court of Admiralty, the Consistory Court, and the Court of Exchequer had been abolished, and he apprehended—if it was not the fact, he had no doubt the Hon. Member for Greenock would contra dict it—that that Hon. Member bad given his support to the Government, upon the condition that they would uphold his motion. He should therefore think it his duty to vote against the appointment of the Committee. Mr. HUNIE thought her Majesty's Government were only acting as the public had a right to expect they should. He thought the worst kind of economy was that of rendering the number of Judges less than was requisite for the public service, but the public had. a right to insist that there should be no more than was requisite for that purpose. All he wished was inquiry on the suuject. 'He was surprised the Hon. Baronet should object to inquiry being made when the subject was the administration of justice in Scotland. Mr. GILLON said be thought the salaries of the Judges should be apportioned to the duties they had to perform. He could hear on all sides of the immense load of business the English Judges had to perform, but it was not disputed that . the duties of the Scotch. Judges were very inadequate to the large salaries they received. He found, on a computation of 8 hours per day, the Judges of the First Division sat but 34 days in the course of 12 months, Wes° of the Second Division but 26 days, and the Lord Ordinary 47 days and 8 hours. He thought, therefore, the people of Scotland had a right to demand inquiry on the subject. Mr. PRINGLE objected io the motion, because he thought there should be some end to the discussion of questions with which, Session after Session, and Par liament after Parliament, the people of Scotland had been vexed. Some time ago a Committee was al,- pointed on the subject, which thoroughly investigated it, and in consequence of whose Report an Act of Parlia• merit was passed to the satisfaction ofall parties, and he thought it unnecessary to disturb the arrangements then made. He thought in granting the present Corn- • mittee the Government were &erecting the Judges of Scotland ; and he should, on these grounds, oppose the appointment of• the Committee. . Mr. STEW.ART rose for the purpose of support ing the motion of the Honourable Member for Green neck. They had, been told that the inquiry was one which the House could not enter into.' He was, how ever of a different opinion. At a time when the House was contend:ng for its pi irileges upon another question, be should like to know why their power should be de nied in an investigation of the present nature. He had heard of Honourable Members making speeches in favour of motions which they were opposed to, and be thought that was the case with the Honourable Member for Stafford. Much of what that Honourable Member had alleged, would go far to support the views of the Hon. Member for Greenock. He should say, for his part, that the present Court of Session did not pcssess the confidence 'of the S.,:ottish people, which it was most important they should have. If the proposed inquiry were instituted under the care of the Government, and if the Committee were com• posed of intelligent Members of both sides of the House, he !achieved the results might be most useful. Mr. HOPE should oppose the proposed inquiry,which he saw no reason for entering, into. It had been said that there was some dissatistaction in Scotland with regard to the conduct of the present Judges, but no reason had been assigned for that dissatisfaction, and the House and the Government could not take any pro ceedings on such a feeling. The reasons assigned for the proposed inquiry bad been refuted on a former oc casion by the Lord-Advocate—by the Learned Attor ney-General, and had been scouted by all sides of the House. He complained that under these circumstances the Government should seem willing to enter into the inquiry. That inquiry he thought ws - nothing better than an i mpeac h ment of those who administer justice in Scotland—he would maintain that it would be tanta mount to a vote of censure against those Judges, and be accordingly oppose it.—( Hear, bear.) The LORD ADVOCATE said that though lie did not coincide in all that had fallen from the Hon. Member for Greenock-, he still thought the proposed inquiry should take place, and he would not hesitate to state his grounds for that opinion. It was his belief the results of that inquiry would prove very beneficial. He believed that if the case should be duly inquired into, much useful informatio n might be brought for ward. He did not join with those who corn• plained of the number of days which the Courts in Scotland sat. He thought that that could be no test or criterion of the efficiency with which they discharged their duties. Neither was that a fair index of the quantity of business, which had been carried on. The time taken in pleading before the Judges was not fhe only test of their labours. There was another sub ject, however, on which complaints had unfortunately been made, and he should admit that from the nature of those Courts, and from the changes which had taken place in them, a considerable dissatisfaction prevailed as to the manner in which they discharged their duties. He did not say that of the outer House, for he believed that there was not a single being, either in or out of the profession, who did not approve of the manner in which business bad been conducted there ; but he spoke solely of the.lnner House. It was said that the Judges there did not st a t e t h e i r op i n i ons i n a manner as explicit as justice would require, and in a way which would show that the interests of the suitors bad been duly cens_Heol. He 441 not. Fee any means of meeting this compiaint, except through the authority of a Committee t> the House of Commons, under the sanction of the GovernMent, and composed of Mem bers who would carefully addreis themselves to the sub ject. The exact amount ef labour to be performed did not seem to him (the Lord Advocate) the true criterion of salary. He rather thought. that having a certain number of Judges, while they remained so, they should be supported in prof er and becoming dignity.— ( Hear, hear.) There was no impeachment of the eon stitution of the Court in inquiring, however, if the nurnbsr of Judges could be reduced. Ile did not think they cod ?, but he knew many people did. And to satisfy the public mind he thought an investigalion under the sanction of Government would be effective. On the teasel thee e fore, he was inclined to support the motion. Sir It. PEEL wondered how any of those who had voted for increasing the salaries of the Scotch Judges, should have done so on any ground of increased labour. He had not done so. He thought such a principle dan gerous. He considered that every public officer should dedicate his whole time to the public service—that his whole time was purchased for the country.—(Hear, hear.) NON he had voted for the increased salary on the ground that he thought the salary not sufficient ; for he considered that the remuneration of Judges should have such a superiority over, or at least such an equality with, the average receipts of the head members of the Bar, as to secure for the Bench the services of the most able and experienced.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He wondered greatly how the Honourable Member for Greenock slutuld think it worth his while to have meta a Committee as this, seeing that it was not to be under his guidance, but the Government—under the direction of men who had much of their minds against him—(Hear, hear)—of men who thought that the e form and reduction which he argued for were unneces sary.—(Hear, hear.) Well, why did they not tell the House that boldly, and resist the inquiry ?—(Hear, hear.) If an inquiry were always to be conceded to public clamour, why should not a similar concession be made in the case of the English Judges, as to whom . the Government could not have made up their minds more decisively than in the case of the Scotch Judges ? Therefore, on that point, if the mind of the Govern ment were made up, and the mind of the profession were made up, he could not conceive what ground they could have for entering on inquiry.--( Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said that he thought four Judges preferable to three in the constitu tion of the Court ; and the Hon. Gentleman on his right hand had said that he had made up his mind on the subject. Of course these Gentlemen would still maintain their opinions, and the Hon. Gentleman was willing to leave this inquiry in the hands of the Git,.• vernment, while, at the conclusion of it, if he attempt to interfere, be would be told that the Government have already made up their minds on the subject.—(Hear, hear.) For, be it remembered, it was the Govern ment who was to have the appointment of the Committee—it was the Government who was to have the appointment of Chairman, who would have to draw up the Report.—(Hear, hear.) But the Hon. Gent. said that inquiry was necessary in order to remove certain erroneous impressions as to the conduct of the Judges. Several persons thought the judges were not sufficiently'patient in hearing the long law arguments of Counsel.—(A laugh.) gow he (Sir It. Peel) would ask, how could they possibly come to a satisfactory con clusion on that point without the examination of the Judges themselves.—(Cheers.) How could they do so, without a personal inquiry of every Judge, why he had not listened with more patience to the arguments in some particular case.—(Hear, hear.) If they made a general allegation of want of patience, the judges would make a general denial of such allegation. They must hove some particular case. Now suppose the Judge, if ' pressed, should say that in that case he found the Counsel so tedious, and consuming the public time by such frivolous and irrelevant arguments, that he deemed it his duty, having made up his mind on the case, to interfere and prevent his proceeding? He (Sir R. Peel) would certainly in such a case be inclined to side with the Judge, more especially when he recol lected having heard at the bar of the House of Lords a Scotch Counsel speak for eleven hours.—(Cheers.) The LORD ADVOCATE—A Counsel in ono case spoke far sixteen hours.— ( Loud laughter.) Sir R. PEEL—Th e H on . M em b er in his anxiety to do honour to the Scotch bar, had said that he (Sir R. Peel) had been guilty of an injustice to the anxiety and zeal of the members of that bar, for their 'clients, in understating the length of the speeches at eleven hours, whereas it appeared that sixteen hours was the ordinary time consumed in the speech of a Scotch Coun sel.—(Cheers and laughter.) Now could anything be more ridiculous than calling on one of those Learned Judges to state his reasons at the eighth or ninth hour —(Load laughter)—'having long before made up his mind, interfering to put a stop to the arguments of Counsel, who was thus wantonly consuming the public time ?—( Loud laughter.) Besides, how degrading would such a course be.—(Cheers.) Of course the patient Judges would be exempted from inquiry —that is to say, those Judges who were too timid to do their duty, or who thought they ware executing their duty if they sat on the bench and suffered their public time to he wasted ; but those Judges who had done their duty ; who said— There are other causes to be decided, and we will not suf fer the public time to be wantonly wasted—those Judges who had decided quickly would be brought before them for inquiry. —(Loud cheers.) The Hon. and Learoed Gentleman had assigned such miserable rea sons for this inquiry, that he was convinced the House would best perform its duty by upholding the di g nity of the Jtelicial B enc h i n S cot l an d , an d refusing the ap pointment of a Committee.—(Cheers.) Mr. - WALLACE could not butt xpress his extreme surprise at the manner the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tarnworth had treated the quostion before the House, and thought the levity with which he had spoken on this subject was unworthy of one who at one time held himself forth as a Law Reformer.—(Cheers.) Enough had been said to show that inquiry was ne cessary, and he could tell the Right Honourable Gentleman, that however lightly he might choose to treat the subject. it was one of deep im portance to Scotland.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman had expressed his surprise that he (Mr: Wallace) should be content to allow the Go vernment to name the Committee, should one be agreed to, alleging that with the Government would rest the appointment of a Chairman and the control of the business. It might be so, but he would persist in his determination of inviting the Goveremeat to take upon itself the important task, seeing it would be far amore respectful to the Judges, whose duties were to. be inquired into, as well as to the legal profession, and the whole people of Scot and, that this course should be adopted, than leave it in the haade of a private Member of Parliament, whose mo tires might be impugned, or his übilites doubted for such a task. Ott that score, however, he could not but remark that no objection was taken by the Right Hon. Baronet and his party to the Hen. Member - for Caith ness (Sir G. Sinclair) being Chairmen of the Commit. tee appointed to inquire into the salaries of the Judges in 1831-, and he had not a doubt that, had he (Mr. Wallace) sat on that side of the House, and been one of his thick and thin supporters, he Would have had the Hon. Baronet's support instead of his opposition on the present occasion. The Right Hon. Member for Tarn worth (Sir Robert Peel) had in a manner pro posed to him to abandon the Comnsheee if he (Mr. Wallace) was not to be its Chairman, but he begged to tell him, that sort of chaff would not catch li;m—(Much laughter)—being thoroughly satisfied that a proper inquiry into the duties of the Judges of the Supreme Court would produce incalculable advantage to the administration of jus fee in that country. When speaking of salaries, the ;aright Honourable Baronet dechsrd that be the salary what it. might of aey public man, it must be understood as the recompense for the Whole of his time. To this declaration he (Mr. Wallace) would fix the Right Hon. Baronet, and 'upon it confidently claim his vote that night, oc the ground that the Judges of the Court of Session in return for a full year's salary give to the country less than a half year's work. He wa s quite satisfied to have the case decided on that view of it, and demanded to know of the Right Hon. Gsn tlemari whether he would cut down the salaries to half their present amount for six months' duty, or leave them as they were, and have a . corresponding degree of useful labour. Upon these terms he (Mr. Wallace) was ready to drive a bargain with the Right Honourable Baronet—decidedly, however, advocating full pay, and the useful occupation of the whole time of the Judges by means of long Sessions and short va cations,—(Cheers.) The Hon. Member for Stamford (Sir George Clerk) had alleged that Government conceded points to the Member for Sheffield and others as the price of their support, and seemed to insinuate that he (Mr. Wallace) must also have bad his on the present occasion. No doubt the Hon. Member had been thinking of the palmy days when he occupied the Treasury benches, and when there was not a Scotch man without his price ; but he could tell them that the three last parliaments had produced one Scotchman at any rate who had been without price—(Much cheer. • ing)—and he would defy any man on that side of the House or the other to say he (Mr. 'W.) had ever asked anything of the G overnment, or that anyth i ng had ever been offred him.—(Hear, hear.) He would not detain the House by recapitulating what already had been urged in favour of a Committee, but conclude by once more Churel. Why should he have sunk it fee a majority o f fi ve ? Why be coetent with such half-andshalf, bit-by bit reform, es that which be expected the count y to be satisfied with ?—(Divide, divide.) Mr. BAINES denied that John Thorogood had re fused to obey the law ; all that he hnd done was to sub mit to the penalty of the law. In Sheffield the inha bitants had not paid Church-rates fiar twenty years.— Had the• Vicar dealt with them as the Rector with John llorogood ? No. Why ? Because he knew that a great body of iuhabitants were opposed to the payment of the raze. John Thorogood complained of the inequa bq of the law. The Quakers had been exoneratl.— Why should they be relieved ? (Lord John Rusell— " They are made to pay.") Yes ; hut should there be one law for the Quakers and another far the Indepeadents? —( Hear, hear.) 'rho Quakers were not incarcerated in prison.—(Lord John—" Yes, but the Dissenters are all to be relieved from that now.") But the Noble Lord had been tardy in his relief, and during that time poor John Thorogood had been confined in prison.— (Hear, hear.) Then in Ireland the whole country had been relieved from the Church cess, or rate. Were such inequalities in the law just 2—( Hear.) The law was, moreover, in itself unjust in principle. Now all these anomalies and irregularities were so many at tempted palliations of a law felt to be unjust.— ( Hear, hear, hear.) The Rector of Chelmsford should have refrained from enforcing so strictly the law, which he knew in other large towns was not en forced, against a poor parishioner of his—the effect of whose prolonged imprisonment would be seriously to in jure his health. John Thorogood complained not of the Ecclesiastical Courts which had merely done that which the law of the realm directed them to do. Let not the Noble Lord suppose that the display of such in tolerance as had been exhibited in this case would only irritate factious disturbers—it would do more injury to the Church than all the evils of Socialism, of which so much had lately been said in another place by a Right Reverend Prelate. The removal of the Dissenters from vestry discussions would have a good effect on the Church, as well as on the peace of the country.—(Hear, hear.) But as the Dissenters were now forced to pay Church -rates, they could not be excluded from vestries. Now the Dissenters, it had been said, were only called -on to pay one- - !ortieth part of the Church-rates. If so, they had only to pay 7,0001. out of 300,0001. a-year. Admittir 6 e this to be correct, which he (M r . B a i nes ) h owever doubted, what absurdity was there in risking the harmotry and peace of society for the sake of so small a contribution ! He would be a great benefactor cf his country who could devise a mode of settling all these irritating causes of dispute. No other effectual mode of attaining such ob ject had been suggested than that suggested by the Hon. Member f o r Finsbury. Therefore he (Mr. Baines) should support. it, trusting that it would tend to produce that enviable state of the Christian world, which had, in the earlier and the purer ages, been described—" See how these Christians love one another ;" whereas it was to be feared that now it would much more justly he said, " See how these Christians hate one another." Sir R. H. INGLIS was surprised that the Noble Lord—to whom the Dissenters owed more than to any other person—(Hear, bear)—should have found his propositions of Church-rete Reform so coldly received by the representatives of the Dissenters in that House. The case of Jahn Thorogood tied not been quite truly stated. That person had stated, in a letter to The Sun newspaper, that Mr. Boykett, the Secretary of the Church-rate Abolition Society, had advised him to re fuse appearance to the citation, saying, that the " cause would derive benefit from it ;" and promising to " move heaven and earth to release him." John Thorogood had been first prepared to appear to the Ecclesiastical Court summons, but he, hapless Wight, had been per suaded not to do so by the " grievance-gathering" So ciety—(Hear, hear)--who thought they could make him a fit subject of their speeches, and then left him to pine in prison, neglected and uncared for—(Hear.) He held that all property was liable to any contribution that the law might call upon it to make, He therefore could not agree to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Finsbury ; nor did he think the case of John Thorogood a proper case on which to bring forward such a measure. He did not feel it necessary on this occasion to enter further into the question ; but, whether the number of Dissenters was small or great, so long as the Church-rate was the law of the land, it was the duty of every one to submit to it ; and the proposition of the Hon. Member for Finsbury was merely proposing to give a bonus to dissent. Sir S. LUSHINGTON said that the Ecclesiastical Courts had no power whatever ica take cognizance of Church-rates if the rate be under 101. If the Church wardens had sued in his Court, and Mr. Thorogood had pleaded he was liable to the rate, he would have been dismissed with costs. But he had brought himself into Court. He had been summoned before two Magis trates, and had denied the validity of the rate, and gave notice that it was his intention to dispute its validity before the proper Courts. It was therefore by his own act that he brought himself within the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Court. When summoned to appear before the Court, he refused to appear, thus voluntarily placing himself in contempt. He regretted his long imprisonment ; but supposing it-had been the case of a husband refusing to appear to the citation of his wife, or of a man keeping a; will in his pocket. If the Court had not the power of committing, the course of justice would be impeded. It was by these ways and these means that the Thorogood came before the Court, and yet the Hon. Member for Leeds had spoken of the cruelty of the Rector of the parish. Tne Rector had no power to interfere,--it all rested with the Churchwarden, who had taken an oath to execute his duty. The whole state of things was different between Sheffield and Chelmsford : in the one place there was a Church-rate, in the other none ; but the law W 43 the same. Now, with regard to the remedy, he believed Church-rates a great griev ance, but he was not therefore bound to vote for every crude proposition. He objected to the principle, that if a person would take a certain declaration, he should derive a certain advantage. lie considered that this was a great temptation to lire farmers, whose rates were heavy ; but the principle was absurd. The man might make the doclaration, and go to Church the next day. The proposition would, he felt confident, when it came to the knowledge of the D:ssenters, cot meet with their approval. The Ecclesiastical Ccmmissioners all, una voce, wished to transfer jurisdiction in cases of Church-rates to the Magistrates. Had this been done, it would have tak...n away the possibility of such a case as this occurring. If any rational and fair measure, founded on just principles, were brought forward to do away with this grievance, he would be one of the first to support it. Mr. HAWES opposed the views of his Right Hon. and Learned Friend. He thought the wiser course would be to vote . at least for the introduction of this BM. The test now sought to be introduced was not to try his faith in a peculiar manner, and yet the Noble Lord considered that it would tempt persons to take an unfair pecuniary advantage. He thbught this might be remedied in Committee. He objected to the mea sure of the Noble Lord. Church -rate, as it stood at present, xas not a statutable tax, and the proposition of the Noble Lord would place them on a new founda tion, and one which every friend of religious liberty 'would be bound to oppose. In many parishes there was no Church-rate. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he did not intend to make it a statutable tax. Mr. HMI ES was sorry be miAunderstood the Noble•Lotd, who was one of the best friends the Dis senters had in the country—(hear, hear)—but he did not 'mistake the Ecclesiastical Commissi.mers, who had recommended that the Church-rates should be paid out of the Poor-rites. With regard to John Thorogood tie should say little, as he did not think that it bore on this Bill. But he felt that this case was doing the greatest possible harm to the cause of the E,tablished Church. He thought it very hard they should have been so long without a remedy for these evils. 'rho absolute ne cessity of coming to a settlement on this question had been admitted for years. Five different plans had been proposed for the settlement of this question, four of which bad been objected to by Gentlemen opposite. Lord Althorp's plan had been opposed by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford, and every other plan had met with similar opposition. Mr. W. ELLIS was afraid the Noble Lord had not duly considered the' determination to which he had come. He was exceeding'y sorry the Noble Lord had made'up his mind to oppose the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. The Dissenters had no feeling against the Church—their only feeling was to be re lieved from the payment of Church-rates, which they considered to he a most obnoxious impost.—(Cries of " Question, question," " Divide, divide." Mr. MILD\TAY would detain the House for only one minute. The Hon. Member for Leeds had endea voured to creat e a very unfair impression, by the ailu• sw'a hhe had requnirleddetoto the Rector of Chelmsford. He as sorry that the cause which the Hon. Member ad vocated —(Hear, hear.) the Rector acted with he bath:ne:t (c e . r h e u d rHe tt h. p by such an attack. the Rate. As that warsta.wr.ong Mr. BRINES expl • -1 linewpahrrelsdesiiiostnhi,noltileogn.litfintardnt enforcing hesitation whatever in retractin g what he bad said. Gent., the Membernfaorbtand4e Mr. T. DUNCO replied.T The Right Hon. int o r w od er uc H ed an h il i e m ts s , el li f ad in s tn ta t t h ed e that John Thorn') 840. enrnestly entreating the Noble L7rd, the Leader of that House, to consider the Committee as one under the charge of the Gaver nment, who should select the members to compose it, and who ought. to be thoroughly gratified to discharge impartially this important duty, and such was his confidence in the perfect fairness and integrity of the Noble Lord, as to rest assured of the selection being such as to give contentment to the people of Scotland, and influence to the result of the labours of the Committee. This proposal is not only made in rod faah, but should the NJble Lord consider the Committee would be better con stituted without he (Mr. Wallace) being upon it, he begged distinctly to tell him he was willing to relinqush the honour of the Chair, and he was most welcome to leave his name out altogether ; for in this mltter, as in all °there, he had no other object in view but the good of his country.—( Hear, burr.) Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The House then divided, and the numbers were For the motion 123 Against it Majority in favour of the motion —l7 EAST INDIES. Mr. MART then rose to move for returns, show ing the extent of the settlement of British subjects in India, since the last renewal of the East India Com pany's Charter. He could conceive no measure of so much importance to the extension of our commerce and the maintenance of our Sovereignty in India as the in troduction and permanent settlement of English, and the East India Company ought to be required to give returns to enable the country to judge how far that body had encouraged their settlement ; he did not know how far it might be in the power of the Right Hon. the President of the Board of Trade to compel the East India Company to give these returns. But it was important that the country should know under what circumstances British subjects transported their capital to a distant part of the globe. Sir J. HOBHOUSE was very willing to accede to the proposal of the Hon. Gentleman, but he hoped to be excused from entering into the other topics upon which the Hon. Gentleman had touched. He was s era willing to do every thing in his power to show the lion. Gentlemen how far the Government and the East India Company had given , encouragement to Europeans to settle in that immense dominion. The return of the papers asked for could do nothing towards compelling the East India Company to allow British settlers to take land in India upon the terms which the Hon. Gen tleman considered most expedient. At the same time he had no objection to the production of those papers. He was quite willing to give all the supplementary in formation in his power. Sir CHARLES GREY begged to ask, the Right Hon. Baronet what was the nature of the tenure under which British subjects were allowed to possess land in India?—Motion agreed to. COMPTROLLER OF THE EXCHEQUER. Mr. LIDDELL, in rising to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, trusted that it was unneces sary for him to disclaim every feeling adverse to the parties who were engaged in the transaction which was the subject of that motion. He had long been ac quainted with the Noble Lord, who was one of those parties, and he could have no feelings towards him but those of esteem and regard, which were shared with him by every person on both sides of the House. If any observations which he might have to offer were at all unpleasant to the Noble Lord, be hoped it would be un derstood that it was only by a strong sense of public duty he was compelled to take the present course. The papers for which he was now about to move would be laid before the House as a matter of course at a later period of the session, and the reason which in &lced him to forestal the period fixed by law was, that there were circumstances connected with the transaction which rendered it a subject for the graver consideration of Parliament. -In the year 1834, shortly before the death of the last Comptroller. of the Exchequer (Lord Grenville), a Bill was brought in, founded upon the Report of the Commissioners of Public Accounts, for remodelling the offices of the Court of Exchequer. That Bill pissed--into a law, and at that time Mr. Henry Ellis, the Clerk of the Polls, discharged all the duties at a salary of 1,400/. a year. The Act of Par liament, founded on the Report of the Commissioners, stated in the preamble that it was expedient that a more efficient mode of performing the duties of the offices of the Court of - Exchequer should be adopted. In 1834. Sir John Newport, then 78 years of age re ceived the appointment of Comptroller of the Exche quer, Mr, Ellis being allowed to retire upon a pension of 1,400/. a-year. (The Hon. Member then proceeded to state the circumstances under which the appointment to the Comptrollership of the Exchequer took place, which cannot but be fresh in the recollection of our readers.) In September, 1839, Sir John New pert retired from that office, and was succeeded by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, the present Lord Monteagle. Sir John Newport, having a pension of 1,0001. a year, five-sixths of the whole sum allowed by Parliament to be granted by her Majesty each year in the shape of pensions. This change of office had given to no less than four persons pensions, and that he looked upon as a fact that would no t b e to l erated by the House. Upon these facts he founded the motion with which le intended to coneltide ; but before he did so, it was right that he should draw the attention of the House to the d'fferent Acts of Parliament regulating the :appointment of this office. The Hon. Member, having adverted-to the different Acts of Parliament, stated that he would leave it to the House to determine from those Acts as to the course they would. think proper to adopt. For his own part, he thought it was highly improper that so large a pension should be given to a gentleman who was greatly adtranced in life, and who he was not aware had clone the public any service. .._.(lreriical cheers from the Ministerial side of the House.) Hon. Gentlemen opposite might laugh, but he would refer to the feelings expressed upon the de bate by Hon. Members when the Right Hon. Bart., the Member for Pembroke, brought before the House his Bill for remodelling the system adopted in the Ex chequer. The Honourable Member for Kilkenny, the Honourable Member for Birmingham, and Colonel Evans, objected to that measure, and were of opinion that Mr. Elis should still hold that appointment. He (Mr. Liddell) had considered this subject most anxiously, and the inference that he drew from the ap pointment that had taken phace was that it was a Mi nisterial job.—(Cheers.) He considered that the cir cumstances he had vated justified him in asking for the pipers he required, and it' those papers were granted he would leave it to the Hltlie and the public to deter mine whether or not they conveyed a censure upon the course adopted by the Government.—(Laughter from the Ministerial side of the House.) His only object was to elicit truth. He would leave the public to draw their own inferences from these papers, and all that he could say was, when they were produced, God defend the right !—(Lities'ater.) The Hon. Gentleman con cluded by moving, " That there be laid before • this House, a copy of the warrant granting a pension to the Right Hon. Sir John Newport. Also, a copy of the letters patent granting the office of Comptroller of the Exchequer to Losd Monteagle." The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he certainly made no complaint against the Honourable Geatle,nan for having brought the subject before the House, so far from it, he was happy at the opportunity af forded him of meeting insinuations and accusations which he never expected to have heard in that House. The Honourable Member said " If you refwe these papers, I call upon Gentlemen to support me to compel-their pro duction, but if you are prepared not only to give not only those, but any others the House may wish, the real facts of the case may be made manifest, I shall draw my own inference, and take it for granted this is the conduct of those who arc guilty of the charges made against them.' (Cheers, and laughter). There were three points in the Honourable Gentleman's accusation. First, the pension to . Sir' J. Newport, of whom, although the Honourable Gentleman had said his name should be a sufficient Protection, lie had, in the course of his remarks, let slip some words which called in question the expediency of his services ; secondly, the appointment of Lord Monteagle ; ,and next, and most important, the connection between, the appointment of Lord Monteagle, and the retirement of Sir J. Newport, which was the sting of the whole attack, and which, if the facts were true, the Hon. Gentleman would have some reason for the accu:a!ion he had made, namely, that Sir J. Newport had been bought out of place—but fora salary, and for the purpose of putting in Lord Monteagle. Now, to this he gave at once the most explicit and unqualified deeial—( Hear, hear, hear)— and he would first read part of a letter front Sir J. Newport himself, and whatever claims he eglit have on the gratitude of his country, he considered it quite sure that those o ho knew him better than the Gentleman opposite,-during his public services of thirty years, would consider that his word might be trusted. He wrote " The regulation was adopted on nay part without being suegested to me by any person, and most certainly arose frot those increased infirmities which rendered retirement to my waive home most desirable, even if I were obliged to re linguish all claim to the pension, to which the embarrass ment occasioned by my long attendance to the duties of Parliament compelled me to resort." That was the state ment of Sir J. N ewport, and the House would observe that it stated three things very distinctly, and which all contra di cted the imputations of the Hen , Gentleman, that Sir .1)11n Newport's retirement was en tirely unconnected with his Noble Friend (Lord Mont teiaognl e ; 'sa)ndaptphoaitntthmeenpten; sitohnatwiats not offeredwasupnnllis on the own part solici ofta- the Gavernment—f or that sass the charge —but applied for by Sir J. Newport, under the circumstances stated. He had also, on th e part of his Noble Friend (Lord Mont eagle), a u th or i ty to give this statement the most perfect confirmation; Cu the part of Lerd Dueesoee: he was authorised to make the same statement.—( Hear.) Lord Melbourne had that day also confirmed to him the truth of this statement ; and he was able, of his own knowledge, although not then holding an official situ ation, to state that the retirement of the one and the ap pointment of the other were entirely unconnected, which statement was moreover confirmed by the testimony of big Noble Friend, the Member for Noraumberland. He did not perceive what more the Hon. Gentleman would re quire, roe Low he could get rid of such insinuations as thhsc, than by a distirct denial of all the parties concerned. Having dealt with that he would gu on to the two other points, and respecting the pension granted to Sir J. New port, the Hon o u ra bl e G en tl emen h a d argue d t h e case as i f that pension were granted for his services in the Et chequer, and referred entirely to his services there, and looked to Acts of Parliament which deprived the Comptroller of the Exchequer of a pension • but he (the_ Chancellor of the Exchequer) cons id ere d ther pension of Sir J. Newpor t would have b een equa ll y proper if i t bad been granted before he received the office, as afterwards; it was not for his services as Comptroller of the Exchequer. The Hon. Gentleman had said he was not aware o f any services of Sir J. Newport. Was he not aware that his name was one rather of histery than of the present day—that Sir J. Newport was the intimate friend of Lord Grenville and enjoyed his confidence? They were rather apt to forget that there were Honourable Members before them, who were as active in exposing abuses as the Hon. Gentleman himself, but perhaps the House would allow him to remind it of some of those services that Sir J. Neiveort had rendered hie - country, which were a justifi cation of the pension he en j o y e d. Si r J . N ewport had served 30 years in Parliament, during which there - was scarcely any question had been agitated in which he had not taken a censiderable share. On questions relating to Ireland he was one of the most active members of the House. He had Sited the situation of Chancellor of tho Exchequer in Ireland, and during that time he carried two leading measures, to which h e wou ld ca ll t h e i r atten tion ; be ha introduced a great alteration in the corn trade, making it between Ireland and England a free trade, and from that time, Ireland, which was then considered a foreign country, had been the granary of England, and received our manufactures in return. The other was, that Sir J. Newport was the person who first recommended to the Crown to issue an inquiry as to the education of the Irish people, and all greet measures relating to education were founded on the Reports of the Committees with which Sir J. Newport was connected. His tenure of office was short; but during that time, and since, his life had not been useless or inactive. There was scarcely a year in which his name was not found as the introducer of measures of great utility to the country. Another mea sure, which he carried by a majority of one only, was for a commission of inquiry into the salaries of the officers o f the Irish Courts of Jndicsture, and into the establishment of those Courts. The course of Sr' Jobe Newport, as an Ws') Member, appeared to him to have been characterized by great attention, even to those smaller measures which had benefited the Irish people ; such as the introduction of lunatic asylums, and of fever hospitals, which owe their origin principally to him. With regard to the tithe ques tion, almost all the recommendations which he had urged on the Government of his time had been carried into effect either by that Government, or by th :se which bad suc ceeded it. He should say that those services performed during a period of 30 years of uninterrupted public duties, and which had injured his privatd fortune, presented a fair and proper object for the benevo lence of the country. The transaction was one which should not be characterised in the terms used by the Hon. Gentleman who had introduced the motion ; - end no objection should be made if the Crown had granted to Sir John Newport, at the age of eighty-four, the sum in ques tion for the - few remaining years of his life. The Hon. Gentleman opposite. had alluded to the amount of that MM. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) should find it hard to decide whether the particular sum should be considered too large or not. At the same time he thought he could show that slime of a similar kind had been granted before in cases of the same description. On looking over the Pension List, he found that Lord Bexley bad received a slob of 3 0001., that 2.0001 had been granted to Lord Auckland that 2,000/. had been also granted to a Right I-lon. Gen tleman opposite (Mr. Goulburn), that 1,500/. had been granted to the Right lion. Mr. Planta, and 1.500/ to Mr. J. W. Croker. He did not say that these sums were too great, and if he had any suspicion with regard to the services of some of those individuals, he should have said that their services were of a nature which he was not the best qualified to decide on, as he had been opposed to then' 'in political life—( Hear, hear)—and it was not for those who had constantly differed with them to pronounce a judg • ment on these claims. With regard to the appointment of Lord Monteagle he knew not what objection could be made to it. He should first say that that Noble Lord had never applied for the situation in question; and with regard to the appointment itself, he should be perfectly surprised to hear any Gent:eman tell him that his Noble Friend - was not one of those who were best qualified for filling the situation. He had been fitted for it .by his long connection with the finances of the countre,—( Hear, hear, and laughter, from the Opposition Benches.) He would venture to say, notwithstanding the laughter of lion. Gentlemen opposite, that no one could perform the financial duties which his Noble Friend had to discharge without a knowledge of our financial affairs. He believed that the knowledge of his Noble Friend on these subjects was as great as that of any other man alive, and appeared to him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) to fit him for for the appointment he had received. It bad been said, however, that Mr. Ellis should have been raised to the office of Comptroller of the Exchequer. That situation lead, however, been already vacant, and though Mr. Ellis had at the time a relative in the Governmen's the situation had not been given to him. A -Right lion. Gentlemen oeposite had said on that occasion that he did not think it would be fair to inquire ir.to appoint ments -made by an Adrn'nistration which would have the appointment of its servants at its own disposal. H e was not aware that there was any other point which it would be necessary for him to allude to. With regard to the imputations of the Hon. Gentleman opposite, he bad already given them a distinct contradiction, and he hoped that when similar imputations might be made against the Government, it should never be thought that because they were ready to give the documents required, they were therefore liable to censure.—(Cheers.) Mr. HUME asked if the Right Hon. Gentleman would produce the letter of Sir John Newport desiring to re tire ?--( Hear, hea r .) . . The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not reply for some moments, during which there were ironical cries of " Hear, hear," and " Chancellor of the Exchequer." At length the Right Lion. Gentleman said he really was not aware if the application bad been made by letter.—.(Oh, oh.) Mr. HUME said the Right Hon. Gentleman had read a document, which he,called a letter, from Sir John New port.—( Hear, hear.) Sir R. PEEL said he would not for a moment question the propriety of a provision for Sir John Newport, consi dining his long services in Parliament, opposed as he bad been to his (Sir Robert's) opinions, on political questions. —( Hear, hear.) But he much doubted the:popriety of making that provision out of the Civil List Pension Fund. —( Hoar.) The office of Comptroller of the Exchequer was the fittest, the most honourable, reward for public services to that office, requiring no great activity. Sir John Newport bad been appointed very justly, at the age of 70. But.why bad his retirement been permitted ?—( Hear, hear.) There was a Deputy in the office, who could relieve the principal from any labour or attendance that might be irksome.—( Hear.) Nov, the appointment of a public man to a pension, on the ground of Parliameetary services was a very dangerous principle. —( Hear, Lear.) It was a bad precedent to enable a public party to draw upon the Crown pension fund for the reward of an adherent.—(Hear, hear.) He by no means denied that great public services might be ren dered by a man out of office,—(Loud cheers from the Opposition, evidently applying to the Right Hon. Bart.— a compliment he appeared to disclaim,) He would just mention the name of Mr. Burke, whose official services bad been short, but whose illustrious services to his country had justly been amply rewarded. But in such a case the House of Commons should be appealed to on the merits of that particular case,---( Hear, hear.) It was a precedent most dangerous to admit, that the Crown, the most proper judge of official services, should judge of parliamentary it was impossible to services.—( Hear,) Supposing now that the pension to Sir John Newport had been granted lot the purpose of facili tating a political arrangement, s ) o — m b ewetazhe had in beenth a that appointedc a case con ceive of a more scandalous misapplication of the public t f o u tooknd meets a . - -a ( n y 't , : I I five-sixths e t er urgent bran, o f h the en r claims might bo made upon them for the mere purpose of facilitating a political arrangement of their own. In that case the Right lion. Gent. bad stated that such was not the fact, and of course he ( Sir R. Peel) assumed that to be the case. But the grants in that ease bad been simultaneous, and unless the Right Hon. Gentleman h tve inx been made pressed without uponout t could sh o w t h at t h e two acts were altogether unconnected— nele,s th e grant of the pension to Sir John Newport would t h h e e cl a a t i t m en o tion fL o o f rd th G Me en o t e v a e g r n l e . ment, he should consider it as one of the most scandalous applications of public money that had ever been made. He (Sir R. Peel) had borne ample testimony to the merits of Sir John Newport, and he did not object to his original appointrns et to this office, but he thought the Government were bound to show the necessity of permitting him to retire.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to the apeoiutroetit of Lord Monteagle, he would not say that he would insist upon the appointment of Mr. Ellis, or of another, but he thought that as far as possible that office shotlld be reserved as a reward for the most eminent public services that a man could render to his country.— (Cheers.) _ . Lord J. RUSSELL, after the explanation of his Right Hon. Friend, did not think it necessary to trouble the House at anv great lengt The Right Hon. Gentleman bad admittcii that the office had been worthily disposed of to Sir J. Newport, and he did not object to his receiving his pension from the public at .his advanced period of life. He had then proceeded to make certain qualifications of these admissions. The first was that 1,0001.- was, to large a pension to be granted out of such a limited fund. lie (Lord J. Russell) would own that it wa3 difficult to lay down a rule for the granting of pensions from that fund; it would be exceedingly difficult to I.y down a rule that none but small pensions should be given. Ho thought that when a person had a claim for long services I J - ,