The Sun. — London, England, 1840-07-31 00:00:00

VEN'ING EDITION. COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL. Yesterday, a Court was held for the dispatch ea business. THE FREEDOM OF THE CITY TO PRINCE ALBERT. The LORD MAYOR informed the Court that he had had the honour of an interview with Prince Albert, and that he expected in a few days to receive intimation of the day on which his Royal Highness would do the Corporation the honour to come to that hall to receive the freedom of the city.—(Cheers.) Mr. WELLS asked whether Prince Albert would take up his freedom in that Court ? The LORD MAYOR replied in the affirmative. Mr. WELLS hoped that the visit would be followed by something.—(A laugh.) The member was supposed to allude to a Mans:on-house banquet, which it was evident, from the manner in which the face of the Court brightened up, would not be at all unwelcome. SPIRITUAL ADVANCEMENT OF NEW SOUTH WALES. Sir PETER LAURIE presented a petition from the Rev. Dr. Lang, Principal of the Australian College, New South Wales, praying f)r the assistance of the Corporation in promoting the intellectual, moral, and spiritual advancement of the colony of New South Wales. The petitioner stated that he had prosecuted the object for upwards of seventeen years, and expended a large property of his own in the attempt ; that during that period the colony had risen from a mere gaol to the yank of one of the most flourishing colonies of the empire, the British capons to it for the past Year having amounted in value to 1,173,4401., implying for a population of 110,000 a consumption of 10/. a bead ; that the benefits derived by Great Britain from that branch of produce was almost exclusively appro priatni by the City of London, and that during the last fifty years 110,000 convicts had been sent: out froin Great Britain and Ireland to the penal colonies in vessels almost exclusively belonging to the port of London. The petition, after enumerating several other advantapos which the City, in the opinion of the peti• tioner, obtained from the colony, concludes thus : " Your petitioner, therefore, humbly begs, that in con sideriltion of the great commercial advantages which the City of London has already derived, and will doubt less lentg_ continue to derive, from the colony of New South Wales, and in consideration also of the great moral wad other advantages it has enjoyed for the last fifty years and upward!, in having that colony as an outlet for its criminal population, and in consideration, moreover, of the enormous public burdens entailed on the free inhabitants of Nair South Wales by the crimi nals sent out to them, as well from the City as from the empire generally, your Hon. Court will be pleased to grant such a sum as may be deemed expedient for the completion of the Australian College in New South Walesohat the founders may thereby be enabled to afford the requisite means of general education, for the training up of well-qualified instructors of youth, minis ters of religion, and missionaries to the heathen, as well for the moral renovation of the heterogeneous popula tion of that colony, as for the advancement of Christian knowledge in the isle adjacent." The Rev. Dr. LANG having addressed the Court at considerable length, Sir PETER LAURIE moved that the petition be re ferred to the Coal, Corn, and Finance Committee. Mr. WELLS opposed the reference. He objected to emigration altogether, and here was an application for support to a college which, if it ought to be supported, should be supported by the Government. He should, therefore, move as an amendment that the peti tion be laid on the table. • Mr. ANDEaTON seconded the motion. The amendment was then carried by a large m ijority. THE SMOKE NUISANCE IN THE CITY. Mr. ANDERTO N gave notice that it would be referred to a Committee to inquire into the annoyances and nui sances to which the inhabitants of the City are subjected from the smoke of manufactories and steam engines, and also from steam boats on the river Thames, and the best means of obviating the same.—(Hear, hear.) ROYAL ASYLUM FOR DESTITUTE FEMALES, MANOR- HALL, CHELSEA. Mr. Samuel Gurney, Mr. Foster Reynold‘, Mr. J. Gurney Fry, Mr. John E. Cooper, the two Sheriffs, and Mr. Thiniton Dyer, appeared at the bar with the following petition, which was presented by Alderman Thomas Wood. To the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council, the humble petition of the un dersigned, Shewctb,—That your petitioners are members of a committee recently appointed to superintend the affairs of a charitable institution, called " The Royal Asylum for the Reception of Destitute Females." That this institution was established in the year 1822; is conducted in all its domestic details under the vigilant superintendance of a committee of ladies, and has rendered great service to society by reclaiming the criminal, sheltering the destitute, and annually re storing to pursuits of honest industry a number of fe males who would otherwise have been left, both by their condlict and example, to swell the catalogue of crime, with which the metropolis unfortuanately abounds. 'bat a large number of the persons admitted into the asylum were prisoners discharged from Newgate, and yct,pg women brought before the City Magistrates upon harget for petty theft ; who having lost their character and placts by dishonest conduct, would have infested London as confirmed criminals ; whereas, by being edu- caeed and disciplined in the asylum, they are, many of them in r z espectable service, and filling other situations with credit ; in fact, such is the character whieli this Institintiop has acquired for correcting ignorant and vicious 'habits, and training its inmates in industrious pursuits, that the managers have more applications for servants than they are able to supply. That in consequence of the removal of this Institu tion to the spacious premises now occupied at Chelsea, called Manor Hall, the ladies who then conducted the Charity became involved in debt, from which they have been greatly relieved by the proceeds of an appeal to the public, and by a liberal contribution from her most gracious Majesty the Queen. It appeared, however, expedient to exonerate the ladies from the embarrass ments which pressed upon them, and with that view a Committee of Gentlemen had undertaken to conduct in future the financial arrangements of the Institution, and to leave the ladies to the performance of the duties more congenial with their habits and feelings, that of regu lating its domestic arrangements, and in superintending the religious, moral, and industrial training of its in mates. That the gentlemen who have taken upon themselves this duty, have, by themselves and friends, raised a sum newly equal to the discharge of the debt, and have male arrangements by which they hope to make the regular receipts equal to the ordinary expenditure of the establishment. They find, however, that the ex hausted state of the funds of the Charity have rendered an outfit necessary, which they will experience great difficulty in providing. Your petitioners, therefore, pray your Honourable Court to grant them some assistance to discharge exist ing claims, and to put the establishment in a state of greater efficiency and more permanent usefulness, &c. Alderman TIIOMAS Wool) supported the prayer of the petition in an excellent speech, in which he spoke of the high promise of the institution, patronised as it was by individuals upon whose exertions the utmost reli ance could be placed. In the Institution every effort would b 2 made to prevent contamination. It was known that by means of what was called the Sheriffs' Fund much good was accomplished in contributing to the necessities of unfortunate persons discharged from Ncwgate. The means supplied, although casual and adventitious, prevented much evil by administering im mediate relief to those who but for that fund go out des titute upon the 'world. In the Manor Hall twenty children would be annually received from Ncwgate, so teat it might be considered under the legitimate influ ence of the Corporation.—(Hear, hear.) He then inovetl that the petition be referred to the Coal, Corn, and Finance Committee. Mr. Hour. felt great gratification in seconding the motian, from his intimate knowledge of the character of the institution. Mr. WELLS moved as an amendment that the pcti tiot shosAl be laid on the table. Mr. ASDiEtaToN advocated the Asylum. Mr. PRITCHARD considered the object completely legitimate, and had the best expectations of the result. Thos petition was referred to the Coal, Corn, and Finance Committee.' BLACKFRIARa BRIDGE. Mr. GALLOWAY, in the absence of Mr. Prior, the Chaikacan of the Blackfriars-brid ge Committee, brought tty it Rtfort relative to the application s of as com panies tb lay their pipes under the carriageway of the bridge. It stated that the Committee considered it itlepedient to allow generally gas-pipes to be so laid. Mr. WELLS, who occasionally puts some very trwkward questions in the Court, suspected from the wording of the report that it was meant to give ah ex clusive right to some particular company. After some discussion the Report was worded in such a manner as to express the opinion of the Committee that it would not be expedient to allow any pipes to be laid down, but left the matter open for future discus sion, and it was unanimously agreed to. Mr. limits (the Chairman of the Market Corn. rnitte) said that a great many persons had asked him whether tL repairs of Blackfriars-bridge were going forward with sufficient despatch, and stated that they had been informed that the contractors were not able to perform their contract within the given time. He wished to be able to satisfy the public on the subject. Mr. BLOCICHILL said that he was quite surprised at the rapidity with which the work was going toward. The Committe e were doing all they could, and were over coming all the ...I, , culties which were opposed to them. The Loan . °R-I have been told by the Chair man this day, that in one month the whole will be ready for the public.—(Hear, hear.) The Court, after the discussion of some matters of mevely local interest, then adjourned. DISCOVERY OF LEAD ORE.--A short time since, while the sexton of i%lothvey, Carmarthen, was digging a grave about five feet from the sui face, he came to a very rich vein of lead ore of the finest quality ; the vein is a very large one.— Wilshman. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS f FROM VIE DAILY PAPERS OF YESTEF.DAY.) (From the Globe.) The Weaver Churches Bill and the Farnham Rectory Bill, which have occasioned considerable discussion both in and out of Parliament, have been disposed of, al though in different ways. The former passed the House of Lords on Tuesday evening : the latter has been with drawn by its friends from the furtherconsideration of Par liament. In both instances, we fear that the Established Church, for the extension of which the measures were avowedly proposed, will derive small advantage from the success of the one and the stifling of the other of these bills. The Weaver Churches Bill establishes a principle of very questionable morality. If there be any one duty of those who are constituted the teachers of religion and the guardians of the hairs more imperative than another, that duty is to inculcate and secure the inviolability of public trusts. The property of the Church, it is ad. mated, is sacred. The Church, as a corporation, has secured to it, for the purposes for which it exists, the re venues appropriated to its use. Every propositicn which trenches on the Church's right of property is met with cries of " spoliation" and " robbery." Yet this sacred principle is outraged by this Bill, which now awaits the Royal assent, by which the Church lays its hands on money derived from public tolls vested in trustees of a navigable river, for the repairs of the locks, banks, and buildings necessary to the navige.tion, and applies it to other purposes. That which the Church designates " robbery," if attempted against itself, is perpetrated in its own favour not only without compunction, but with complacency! The means become sanctified by the end ! The money is abstracted for holy purposes ; and that which would be dishonest, if committed for any other purpose, is expedient, nay, is holy, just, and good, if done in the ❑ame of piety! The precedent esta blished by this Bill is not merely dishonest—it is dan gerous, and will, sooner or later, recoil with increased force against the institution in favour of which it was so zealously urged. (From the Standard.) Most of the public journals have thought it neces sary, in announcing the decease of the Earl of Dur ham, to O'er some critical notice of the part which his Lordship acted in public affairs. We feel little temptation to follow their example, because we are of opinion that it is upon the private life of the de ceased nobleman surviving friends will look back with the most of that consolatory pride which softens grief. We have heard, and can easily believe, that in private life Lord Durham was exceedingly amiable. Munificent he was to the largest extent of his ample means, as some of his public acts prove ; and the sorrow with which he is lamented by his immediate circle de monstrates that his temper must have been warmly dis posed to friendship, kindly and affectionate. 111-health, which has afflicted him through life, and bereave ments and disappointments, of which he has bad his full share, must have given irritability to his dis position ; but the facts to which we refer prove that this irritability was not sufficient to impair the effect of his amiable qualities. On the whole, Lord Durham was a man to be loved and respected, or he would not have been loved and respected as he was by those who knew him best. This is an enviable character ; and it is by no means inconsistent with a public character of a different kind. If an angel were committed to the party and principles to which Lord Durham was com mitted almost from the cradle, he must have been, as Lord Durham was, unhappy and mischievous in his public conduct. The Noble Earl, however, was not an angel, bat a frail man of no very high order of in tellect. Feeble and ambitious, he cultivated his small talents to the highest point of which they were capable. (From the Courier.) The late Earl of Durham was a person so devoid of fixed principles of action, so little endowed, moreover, with vigour of intellect, cultivation of mind, and matu rity of judgment, for that soundness of comprehension which justifies and issues in the unswerving conviction on which depends consistency of course, that nothing can well be in worse taste than the injudicious, as ill founded, eulogiums with which friends unreflecting, false, or frivolous, or with which pretending and perfidious admirers for mere party purposes, seek to trouble the fortunate oblivion into which he, his strange vagaries, his notorious defects of cha racter, and his ambition, inordinate as his pretensions were shallow, had, happily for his own peace of mind, fallen during his latter days, and which should have been left undesecrated by profane hands to the eternal sleep of the tomb. That Lord Durham possessed good natural powers with a certain quickness of perception will not be denied ; that they had been " carefully cultivated" is a foolish exaggeration which every one of his standing at College, and all who came in contact with him either in public or private life, can readily testify. His quickness of perception extended not beyond the surface of things, and the superficiality of his acquirements and knowledge was unredeemed either by industry or perseverance. He took his lesson on every subject which he presumed to treat from the oral dictation of the stronger minds of the party among which his fate was accidentally cast, and he repeated it by rote when occasion invited for the display. There is not one speech of his that can be cited which soars above common-place, if perhaps we except that on the Reform Bill in the House of Lords, a question eminently popular and adapted for show, not difficult to treat with a view to effect, and on which he really appeared for the first time to have expended some mental labour. LAW INTELLIGENCE. HOUSE OF LORDS, JuLT 30. The House sat to-day for the purpose of hearing ap peals. The Peers present were the Earl of Shaftesbury (Chairman), Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Brougham, the Earl of Devon, and the Earl of Warwick. THE EARL OF HARDWICKE V. SIR CHARLES DOUGLASS, This case came before their Lordships upon appeal from the decision of the present Lord Chancellor when Master of the Rolls. The question in the case was whether a devise in the will of the late Sir Charles Yorke of the residue of his property to Sir Charles Doug lass was revoked by the second codicil. Upon the case coming on before the Master of the Rolls, he decided that the devise was not revoked, and from that decision the present Earl of Hardwicke appealed. The case was fully argued a year or two ago, and to-day it was reargued by one counsel only on each side, Mr. Pemberton appear. ing for the appellant, and Mr. Wigram for the respendent. Their Lordships postponed giving judgment. HOGGEN V. RANKEN. 1 Lord BROUGHAM gave judgment to-day in this case; the question in which related to the validity of a deed in con sequence of erasures. The Noble Lord advised their Lordships to affirm the decision of the Court below, with out costs. Judgment accordingly. REDDER V. REID. Their Lordships also gave judgment in this case, affirm. ing the decision of the Court below with costs. TIIE EARL OF STRATHMORE V. Ent I. D. PAULL. The Lord Chancellor and Lord Brougham gave judg ment in this case, affirming the decision of the Court of Sessions. COURT OF CHANCERY, JULY 29. The Lord Chancellor sat in Lincoln's InnHZlto-day. THE DURHAM AND SUNDERLAND RAILWAY COMPANY V. WAWM. The arguments in this case, which were part heard yes terday, were resumed and concluded to-day. The case came before his Lordship upon motion to discharge an order pronounced by the present Master of the Rolls dissolving an injunction which had been previously granted ex pane. The short facts of the case were as follow. The plaintiff's having occasion for the site of two public houses in Sunderland fur the purposes of their rail way, entered into an agreement with certain parties who held the property as tenants in common for a lease of 99 years, at a certain rental. The parties who so contracted with the Railway Commissioners were entitled to five sixths of the property of the defendant. Mr. Wawm was the owner of the other sixth. Mr. Wawm, upon being applied to, refused his assent; notwithstanding which the plaintiffs took possession of the property in 1835, and hav ing pulled down the hcuses, erected on their site the sup ports of the banks of the railway. the defendant then brought an action of ejectment, in which he failed to prove his title ; but upon a sec on d t r i a l h e ob tained a writ of possession, which he placed in the hands of the Sheriff with directions to pull down the supports of the railway. An application ex parte was then made to the Court on behalf of the plaintiffs for an injunction, which was granted ; but upon motion f or t h at purpose that injunction was dissolved, and from that judg ment the case came before the Court by way of appeal. At the conclusion of the arguments to-day— judgment on LORD CHANCELLOR said he would give on Wednesday next. Y CHANCELL OR' S COURT, JuLT 30. IN THE MATTER OF TAILOR. The further arguments in this part-heard case, which came before the Court upon the petition of Mrs. Taylor for access to her children, occupiad his Honour the Vice- Chancellor the whole day. As the case is one of consi derable delicacy, arising out of differences between Mr. and Mrs. Taylor, we refrain from entering further into its details, until the arguments are concluded, and his Honour pronounces judgment. Parliament will next month. be prorogued on the 11 th of DOVER , JULY 29 —Lord Granville, English Ambassador at the Court of France, arrived here yesterday on his way to Faris. He slept at Dover last night, and this morn ing proceeded to Boulogne by the Britannia steamer under a salute from the heights. The weather here has been most genial for the last few days, an d t h e crops are rap idl y a d vanc i ng to maturity. An average return is expected, should the weather continue favourable. A gloom has been cast over the minds of many of our citizens by the melancholy intelligence of the death of that liberal and distinguished nobleman Earl Durham, who, but th e ot h er d ay, as it were, left here for Cowes, it was presumed, much improved in health, while confident hopes were then entertained of his uhimate recovery. Very great distress prevails at this moment amongst the peasantry in the West of Ireland, particularly in Galway and Mayo. Some of the landlords —resident and ab sentee—have contributed several sum% to the alleviation of this melancholy state of things. The price of provisions was, however, fortunately falling in the markets. It is expected that Mr. Brady, the Attorney- General, will have the vacant seat on the !rid' Bench, and that Mr. Pigott, the Solicitor, will be appointed Attorney iCifteocrt: G w e ill er ° a e l ca i; a s t present a isy Member, notcan t h a ce doubt. and of his General. This arrangement, if carried so into lforClonna el, for which the re. election for which pl ane there The new Solicitor-General will, we sup- va pose, be Mr. Sergeant Moore, and the new Sergeant Mr. liatehell. IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN T. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 30. The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. Sir R. JENKIN presented a petition from the Soli citors of Shrewsbury, praying for the removal of the Courts of Law to Chanccrylane. Mr. JOHN NEILD presented a petition from Malmesbury, against the present. system of Rural Police. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brought in the Consolidated Fund Bill, and the Ex chequer Bills Bill, both of which were read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow. THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDA Y, JULY 31, 1840. POSTAGE BILL. The Postage Bill went through Committee on the motion of Mr. R. STUART. The House resumed, and the Report to be further considered on Monday. Mr. M.KIN NON presented a petition from a clergyman who had been two years connected with the Hudson's Bay Company, complaining of the Indians being still in a state of slavery. BIRMINGHAM. Sir E. WILMOT begged to know whether, in the Bill about to be introduced by the Government to pro vide for the administration of justice in Birmingham, any provision would be introduced to repay the county for the sums advanced by the county for the main tenance of the prisoners of the borough ? Lord J. RUSSELL thought a clause to that effect might be proposed by the Hon. Baronet. Sir E. WILMOT said it would be useless for him to propose the clause unless he received the support of the Government. Mr. F. MAULE said the Hon. Baronet's proposi tion appeared to him a reasonable one, and if a clause to that eff!ct was proposed, it would receive the assent of the Government. SLAVERY IN INDIA. Sir S. LUSHINGTON begged to ask whether the investigation into slavery in India had not been taken out of the hands of Lord Auckland, and placed in the hands of other parties, and when they were likely to have a Report on the subject ? Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE said the subject of In dian slavery had been referred to the Law Commission ; they had made a very voluminous Report of 1,857 folio pages. When the Report was printed, it would be sent to England, and he expected to receive it by the next Indian mail. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from J. B. Ryder, 159, Sloane street, Chelsea, a Poor-law Guar dian, complaining of the present Poor-law system ;of the union of the parishes of Chelsea and Kensington, whereby the former had lost upwards of 2,0001., ard imploring the serious attention of the House to the subject, and the removal of the present Commissioners. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, the third reading of the Joint Stock Banking Company Bill was postponed until to-morrow. Colonel SIBTHORP presented a petition from Dundee, signed by the chairman of the Democratic Society, praying the House to address her Majesty to dismiss her present Ministers, and call to her councils those who would make the Charter a Cabinet measure. The Gallant Colonel said he heartily con curred in the first prayer of the petition, but be could not concur in the other. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE BILL. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the administra tion of justice having undergone the investigation of a Committee in the other House of Parliament before being sent down to that House, he had hoped that it would have met with almost unanimous concur rence, which could alone authorize the pressing it at the present advanced period of the Session ; he had hoped that no material objection would have been taken to it. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, however, bad given notice of a motion on the subject of the administration of justice by the House of Lords, and before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, in connection with this subject, and had also objected to the Bill on account of the late period of the Session. He thought that this notice of the Right Hon. Gen tleman took away from the Bill that general and unani mous support which was necessary to authorise the passing it during the present Session, and that it would not be advisable to discuss a Bill of so much import ance when so many Members competent to give an opinion on the subject were unavoidably absent. Such being the case it was not his intention to go on with the Bill during the present Session ; but he should reintro duce it early in the next Session. He would therefore move that the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Bill be now read and discharged. Sir E. SUGDEN had not stated that it was his in tention absolutely to oppose the Bill. He had long since' given notice of his intention, whenever this Bill . should come, of moving a resolution that it was the first duty of Parliament to provide for a better administra tion of justice before the House of Lords, and the Judi cial Committee of the Privy Council, and also to make a motion, founded on the resolutions, which by the courtesy of the Noble Lord, and for which courtesy he felt much obliged to him, he had been enabled to lay on the table of the House. He was not prepared to deny the necessity of further aids to the Court of Equity. His objection to the Bill was to its standing as a measure by itself, without being brought forward - in connection with further improvements in the administration of justice. He could assure the Noble Lord that he would not, in the next Session, object to his introducing such a Bill as the present as a foundation for a measure for the better administration of justice ; and if the Noble Lord and his colleagues, during the recess, would turn their attention to the subject of an improvement of the judicial committee of the Privy Council of the Appeals, to the House of Lords, and of the Bankruptcy Court, they would find him most anxious to support them in carrying into execution any general measure on that sub ject. Had it not been so late in the session he should have proposed the appointment of a Committee to in vestigate the subject, as he thought that with the advantages of the investigation which had already been instituted on the subject in the other House, a Committee, formed of Members for both sides of the House, might devise such measures as would lead to a satisfactory reform in the administration of justiee in the Courts of Equity. He did not object to the present Bill, but he thought it ought to be made the foundation of a more extended measure. The Order of the Day was then read and discharged, After which The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a peti• tion in favour of the Bill.—(A laugh.) SULPHUR MONOPOLY. On Lord JOHN RUSSELL moving the Order of the Day for the Committee on the Regency Bill, Lord SANDON said he would take that oppor tunity of putting to the Noble Lord, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, the questions of which he had given notice relative to the arrangement which had been en tered into with Naples with regard to the Sulphur Monopoly. He wished to know at what period that monopoly would cease, and what was the nature of the indemnity agreed to be given by the Neapolitan Go vernment for the losses sustained in consequence of it. Lord PALMERSTON said that her Majesty's Representative had met at Paris the Neapolitan Pleni potentiary, who had been sent there with full powers to agree to the award of the mediatorial power. that award had been made. They had not heard from Naples on the subject, but he had no doubt whatever of the agreement of the Neapolitan Government to that award, the nature of the arrangement was that the monopoly should cease as soon as the award should be known at Naples. Therefore, it might be assumed that the monopoly would cease in the shortest possible period after the conclusion of the arrange ment. He took it for granted that such would be the case. The principles which were to regulate the negotiations on the subject were to be laid down by five Commis sioners, two of whom ware to be Neapolitan, two Bri tish, and one French. The French Commissioner was to act as arbitrator, in case of any difference between the others ; and the selection of that Commissioner was to be such as would have the previous consent of the Neapolitan and British Governments. In answer to a further question from Lord SANDON, Lord PALMERSTON said that as regarded the Portuguese clams two proposals were under considera tion for their arrangement, and the Government would adopt that which might be found the more satisfactory. REGENCY BILL. On the motion of Lott' J. RUSSELL, the Regency 1111 went through Committee, and was ordered to he read a third time to•morrow. EAST INDIA SHIPPING BILL. On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the E India Shipping Bill was read a third time and passed. METROPOLITAN POLICE COURTS BILL. On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the Metro politan Police Courts Bill was read a third time and passed.. RAILWAYS BILL. Lord SEYMOUR moved the third reading of the Railways Bill. Lord G. SOMERSET did not rise for the purpose of opposing the third reading of the Bill, but he wished to call to the recollection of the Right Ho nourable Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade the conversation which took place with respect to the appointment of inspectors. He understood that one Gentleman was anxious to be ap pointed Inspector ; now, he for one must dissent from any appointment, whether of o'ne or more Inspectors, unless the individuals appointed were unconnected with any of the existing lines. He trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman, before the Bill passed, would state to the House the course he intended to adopt. Mr. L ABOUCHERE said there was not only one .but several Gentlemen who had expressed their anxiety to be appointed i ns pectors.—(Laughter.) He must de cline, however, to give the Noble Lord any distinct pledge, one way or the other, as to the course he in tended to pursue. He reserved to himself the right to fix upon the course he should think proper to adopt to carry the Bill out effectually until after it had pssed. He must decline to state whether he thought it would be advisable to appoint one or more inspectors ; but this much he would state that he should certainly think it objectionable to appoint any person who at the time was connected with any railway whatever, but whether past connection would opente as a disqualification be would not pledge himself. Mr. EAST HOPE said that the present was a mea sure of great importance, and one that was but little understood even by those who brought it in, in compari son with its importance. It was admirably adapted to do harm, and in no way of considering it, was it calculated to do good. He m us t, therefore, deprecate further proceeding with the Bill, until an opportunity had been afforded of discussing its merits, as in no stage of the Bill had thosa merits been dis cussed. He trusted, therefore, that a period would be fixed upon which that discussion might take place, in order that those who were interested in the measure might state their opinions. Sir A. DALRYMPLE did not understand how the Bill was to be carried into effect—whether there was to be a constant supervision, or wheth er p ersons were t o be occasionally employed to inspect the railways. Mr. LABOUC HERE observed that the Bill had not yet passed. Whenever the Bill did pass h e s h ou ld consider what the powers given to him under the Bill as President of the Board of Tiede were, and how they could best be carried into eff ec t.—(H ear , h ear .) He would have to submit to the Treasury every ' scheme, and would be responsible to Parliament if it should appear that he had improperly exercised the powers given to him, Capt. BOLDERO was glad to fi n d th a t t h e Bill h a d been much improved since it was last before the House. Mr. E WART hoped the Bill would be postponed till to-morrow. Lord SEYMOUR. had postponed it from week t o week for the accommodation of Members, and could not consent to any further delay. Mr. HINDLEY hoped the Bill would be postponed till next Session.—(A laugh.) It was a very bad Bill, in his opinion, and unnecessarily i n t er f ere d w i t h t h e mana gement of the railway compa n i es . A t present t h e co mpany were responsible, but if an I nspector were appointed, the public, between the two stools, would fall to the ground ; and in case of any accident nobody would know to when blame should be attached. However, he hoped the Noble Lord would give the House an opportunity of discussing the Bill to-morrow. Lord SEYMOUR could not consent to postpone the Bill over that evening. Mr. 11 INDLEY then moved that it be postponed till to-morrow. Lord SANDON seconded the motion. The House divided, and the numbers were— For the motion Against it B3 Majority against the postponement.. --.,50 The third reading of the Bill was then postponed till after the other Orders of the Day this evening. The Roscommon Town Lands Bill was read a third time, and passed. A message from the Lords brought down several pri vate Bills, which had passed the other House. The Oyster Fisheries (Scotland) Bill was read a third time, and passed. On the reading of the Order of the Day for receiving the Report on the Bank of Ireland Bill, Mr. YOUNG said that he had been requested by the Directors of the Provincial Bank of Ireland to deny a statement which had been made in the course of the discussion upon this Bill, to the effect that the Bank of Ireland had rendered theirßank pecuniary assistance in their difficulties. The statement was wholly unfounded, as the Provincial Bank had never received any kind of assistance, pecuniary or otherwise, from the Bank of Ireland. The Report, with some verbal amendments, was then received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. On the Report of the Slave Trade (Venezuela) Bill being brought up, Captain PECHELL complained of the manner in which the bounties were paid to the captors of slave ships. They were measured by the British tonnage, and the consequence was, that the captors of a 300 slave ship of 138 tons, from its peculiar build, were paid for only 38 tons. By the present Bill a compromise was effected, but he contended that those employed in the arduous task of keeping down the slave trade, did not receive that which Parliament intended to give them when the bounties were instituted. He would rest perfectly satisfied if the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer would assure him that the Treasury would pay for empty slavers as well as for those having slaves on board ; and he begged to return his thanks, in the name of the Navy, to the Right Hon. Gentleman for abolishing the fees which used to be so unjustly exacted from captors upon being paid the bounty. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that it was necessary to have some sort of evidence as to what the tonnage was ; that in the absence of all such evidence there was great difficulty in adjudicating. In that, as in all other prize captures, sometimes they got a good prize and sometimes a bad one. Captain PECHELL said that those ships were broken up in 1836, at which time no account whatever of the tonnage was required by law. The Report was then ordered to be received. CHURCHES BUILDING BILL. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, the report on the Churches Building Bill was received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time on Monday. POPULATION (IRELAND) BILL.) On the motion of Lord MORPETH, the report on the Population (Ireland) Bill was received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. LINEN, &c. MANUFACTURES (IRELAND BILL. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER containedsome pro having moved that the House s h ou ld go i nto Commit tee on the Linen, &c. Manufa c t ures (I re l an d) Bil l. wasM r r . ea N d V y A tu ßß ad U m ß it T th O a N t it said h e hoped the e Bill useful l would . not be allowed to proceed f art h er th i s Session. He Vi\sions, but he also found in it clauses of a very stringent nature, derived from An English Act, passed so long ago as the year 1774, when measures of very great rigour were not closely enough investigated, or were permitted to pass with greater facility than at present.—(Hear.) m th a a o t o fa t o h t e o ror ß s : or i n its of He did not think p se e n r t ativ fo e rm wea r o he would meet Ire with the approval of a great p or tion of t. the pe Ire land, and no Bill which did not receive such approval, could be attended with beneficial results. Some of the clauses of the Bill appeared to him so severe and loosely drawn, as to render it impossible to amend them without giving more time to the consideration of those amendments than could be given during the pre sent session. As an instance of the severity o some of the clauses he might state that by one a power was given to search premises for goods supposed to be stolen, without a warrant from a Justice. By this Bill any person resisting the entrance of a peace officer, with or without a warrant, was liable to have his property seized, and, after notice, that pro perty might be exposed to sale, and one half of the proceeds given to the Peace Officer who went to seize without a warrant !—(Hear, hear.) He would put it to the House whether such a Bill as that ought to be allowed to pass. At any rate they ought to go into Committee:on the Bill, and examine strictly every word, and sentence. He did not deny that some Bill might be necessary, or that there were rot some useful clauses in the Bill, but he contended that the el itises required , the most close and strict investigation, and that investi gation could not be properly conducted in the present session. He would therefore move that the Bill be committed that day three months. Mr. LABOUCHERE could assure his Hon. Friend that nothing could have induced him to propose the Bill to the House if he was not persuaded that it had the entire concurrence of the manufacturers, and the great majority of operatives engaged in the linen trade in Ire land. He had received the strongest representations, that the present state of the law was most detrimental to the interests of the trade, and urgently demanded alteration.—(Hear.) His Honourable Friend had commented on the extreme s tringency of the Bill, but it would be found that all those clauses were ex actly in accordance with the present law of England, in many cases mitigated. No doubt that law was of an old date, but it was in operation and acted upon at the present time. The Bill consisted of first, clauses to assimilate the law to that of England ; and, secondly, to provide for some peculiarities in the manufactures in Ireland, but he could assure the House its provisions had met with the approbation of bo th p arties to be af fectedly it. The delay which had arisea in its intro duction arose from the circumstance of his refusing to introduce the Bill until he had sent it over to Ireland. It had been considered there, and the result was that both manufacturers and operatives were most anxious for the Bill. Of course, if hi s Hon. Friend persisted in his opposition, the MI could not be proceeded with during the present Session, but considering the urgency of the measure, and that it was only to last for one year, he trusted his Hon. Friend would withdraw his objection. discuss the question, He beli eve d w h en they came to the Bill would not be found so o bjectionable in principle as the Hon. Gentleman thought it. It was merely as similating the law of Ireland to the law of England, at the same time introducing a dditional clauses, which were as serviceable to, and as much approved of Ly, the work men as the masters.—( Hear.) There were certain clauses in the Bill to which the great body of the operatives attached the highest importance, as they considered them a set off against the stringent c'auscs to which the Hon. Member had alluded. There were hundreds of workmen who felt the necessity there was, for their own interests, for putting a stop to the pre sent wholesale system of embezzlement of materials. The manufactures in the North of Ireland were not carried on as they were in this country in factories, but the ma- teridls were given out to the workmen who manufac tured them in their own h o uses. This system he should not wish to see altered, but the opportunities of embez zlement under such a s ystem were so great that it would be impossible to carry on manufacturing in that way without the adoption of some such measure as the one now proposed. Sir R. FERGUSON hoped his Hon. Friend would allow the Bill to proceed. It was impossible that the present system of embezzlement of materials could be allowed to continue. This was carried on by the weavers principally, and it was impossible to prevent it without some such stringent measure. It was absolutely necessary to get rid of the receiving houses, and it was that portion of the Bill that the Hon. Mem ber had objected on account of its arbitrary character. The operation of the seven clauses was strictly limited to cases where it might be supposed that the goods would be removed before a warrant could be procured. This had long been the law in the City of Glasgow P o lice Bill, and so far from being found too stringent, both workmen and masters were now calling for in creased power. The present state of affairs on this subject in the North of Ireland was such that he was authorised to state that if some such Bill as this were not passed, they would be compelled to withdraw from the trade altogether. Captain JONES approved of the Bill, and he was sure it would produce very desirable effects. If the Bill did not pass, thousands who were now receiving wages would be thrown out of employment. Mr. WAKLEY disapproved of the stringent clauses of the Bill. He hoped that if the House went into Committee the 11th clause would be struck out, and that the measure would not extend beyond the Ist of May next. Mr. DUNBAR defended the Bill. Mr. S HEIL said there would be every disposition on the part of his Right Hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade to attend to any suggestion that might be made by Hon. Members. He could assure the House that the interest of the hand-loom weavers had been consulted in the Bill. Nobody could deny that consi derable embezzlement took place under the present state of things. He hoped that for the sake of the operatives the Hon. Member would allow the Bill to go into Committee. Mr. WARBURTON was willing to afford the Hon. Gentleman an opportunity of amending the Bill, if he could, in Committee. He would therefore withdraw his amendment, reserving to himself the right of opposing the Bill upon the Report, if he still thought it objectionable. The House then went into Committee. Clause 1 was agreed to, as was also clause 2, with some verbal amendments. Clauses 3,4, and 5 were agreed to. On clause 6 being proposed, Mr. HAWES said this clause was the most extra ordinary legislation that had ever been proposed ; it provided that the person from whom the property was seized should be obliged to prove to the satisfaction of the Justice, either that he had come honestly by it, or that it had been surreptitiously put on his premises —he must prove from whom he bought it, or it was to be taken as stolen property. He moved that the clause be struck out, for the purpose of assimilating the clause to the English law. Sir R. FERGUSON had no objection to the words of the English law—it went as far as the promoters of the Bill wished to go. The clause was struck out. Clauses up to 10 were agreed to. Clauses 11 and 12 were struck out, to be remodelled and introduced on the bringing up of the Report. Clauses up to 18 were then agreed to. On clause 19 being proposed, imposing a penalty of 21. on the workmen offending against the provisions of the Bill, and in default of payment, subjecting him to two months' imprisonment, Mr. WAKLEY asked if 1/. a month was the value set upon a man's liberty in Ireland ? He should pro pose as an amendment that the term of imprisonment be one month instead of two. The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24, were agreed to, with verbal amendments. On clause 25 being proposed, Mr. WARBURTON objected to it as unnecessary, and it was struck out in consequence. ...... _ Clause 26 was agreed to. On clause 27 being proposed, Mr. WARBURTON moved that the term of im prisonment ordered by the clause should be reduced from two months to one. Agreed to. The clause as amended was ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses up to 36 were agreed to with verbal amend , ments. On clause 37 being proposed, Mr. WAKLEY said that, as the clause stood, the Act might be in force for two years. Mr. LABOUCHERE thought it advisable to continue the Act until the end of the next Session of Parliament. The clause was then agreed to. The preamble was agreed to. The House resumed, and the Report was ordered to be received on Monday. CHURCH DISCIPLINE DILL. On the Order of the Day for the House going into Committee on the Church Discipline Bill being read, Mr. WARBURTON said he hoped that the Bill would not be passed during the present Session, as the clergy had not had an opportunity of making themselves acquainted with its provisions. He was not much in correspondence with those gentlemen— (Hear, hear, and laughter)—but his Hon. Friend the Member for Halifax, had sent copies of the Bill to se veral clergymen, who objected to the Bill, on the ground of there being no means of getting at the accuser of a clergyman, who might skulk behind the Bishop's robe. The Bill gave several appeals, but said not one word of costs. The Court was altogether a prelatical one, and no power of challenge was given to the parties ac cused. In the former Bill there were various enact ments for giving protection to the clergy, but none such were introduced into the present measure, which had placed the working clergy entirely in the power of the Bishops. This was not the case in other professions.-- (Hear, hear.) In the army, for instance, a Court-martial for the trial of an officer was constituted partly of officers of his own grade, such was not the case here, and he hoped the Bill would not be proceeded with in such a House or at so late a period of the session. He would move that the further con sideration of the Bill be postponed to that day three months. Mr. HAWES seconded the amendment, but upon different grounds to those brought forward by his Hon. Friend. It was stated by a Minister of the Crown last session, on a motion which had been brought for ward, that a reform should take place in the Ecclesias tical Courts. Now, this Bill, instead of that reform, created an irresponsible and secret tribunal. Since the time of Thomas a' Becket there had never been such an attempt on the part of the Bishops to acquire power. A Bishop might drag any clergyman before this secret tribunal on anv vague charge of heresy. He had had a distinct pledge on a motion which he brought for ward relating to a case of subtraction of Church -rates, that a reform of the Ecclesiastical Courts should take place, and this miserable Billwas the only attempt made. Not one of the proposals of the Ecclesiastical Com missioners had been carried into effect. The Bishops could only agree upon a measure conferring power upon themselves. He hoped his Hon. Friend would perse vere in his opposition. Mr. HODGES had submitted the Bill to various clergymen, most of whom approved of it, although some of them objected to its details ; be believed some such Bill necessary. Dr.NI C HOLE should certainly attempt to carry the Bill this Session, and until some such measure as the present was passed it would be impossible to king forward any measure for the reform of the Ecclesiastical Courts. The principle of the Bill was approved of by the greater number of the clergy. The third clause did not authorise the issuing a Commission for the trial of a clergyman, but the Commission was in the nature of a Grand Jury. It was he (Dr. Nichol!) who had introduced the words, rendering it imperative on the Bishop to issue the Commission on a complaint being made. He was also responsible for not having clergymen as members of the tribunal, as he thought clergymen were no more entitled to be tried exclu sively by clergymen than surgeons by surgeons, or law yers by lawyers. A Bill of this nature had come down twice from the House of Lords, and he trusted the House would permit it now to go into Committee in or der to discuss the various clauses. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divivided, when there appeared-- For going into Committee 27 Against it :5 Majority for going into the Committee --12 The House then went into Committee on the Bill. Clauses 1 and 2 were agreed to. On clause 3 being proposed, Mr. WARBURTON objected to the clause be cause it permitted any party to make an accusation, and institute proceedings without giving any security for costs, or the Bishop himself might institute them without giving any security for costs. A Bishop might institute the proceeding and ruin any clergyman by the costs, and if the clergyman were acquitted, there was no provision to enable him to recover his costs. Was that fair ? Then with regard to the Court of In quiry, it consisted of five persons, and four out of the five ,were appointed by the Bishop. Now, where he was the accuser he ought not to have the appointment of the Court. In eases where the Bishop was not the accuser, the accuser ought to be brought forward, so that it might be known who he was. It was impossible to amend the clause, and therefore lie should move its omission. Mr. HODGES had not heard from any of the clergy whom he had consulted, any objection to the clause, and therefore he should support it. Mr. G. VERNON supported the clause. Any Bill was an improvement upon the present condition of the law. He considered the objeetlons of the Hon, Member for Bridport as quite untenable. Every clergyman on his institution took an oath of canonical obedience to the Bishop, and therefore it was neither decent nor fit in him to object to the Episcopal juris diction. Mr. BAINES was opposed to the clause. It would lead to the establishment of a secret tribunal—of a tri- bunal from which the public would be excluded. If such a tribunal were established, the clergy would he reduced to a state of spiritual bondage. Mr. WA KLEY said that the Bill could remedy no evil which the existing law might not remedy. But he objected to it besides, inasmuch as it appeared to him to revive the ancient Inquisition in its most odious form. It was a measure, he was sure, introduced by some med dling Bishop, who would be the person least likely to exercise the power which it gave with prudence, with temper, or forbearance. The Hon. Member concluded by moving the omission from the clause of the words which authorised Bishops to institute inquiries into the characters of clergymen against whom evil reports might have circulated. Sir DE LACY EVANS objected to the excessive powers given by the clause. Dr. NICHOLL would persist in pressing the clause on the consideration of the House. He did not think that it gave the Bishops any power of which the parochial elegy could complain. After a few words from Mr. PRIM and Captain PECHELL, the amendment was withdrawn. Mr. WARBURTON then moved the omission of the words which gave the bishop the power of instituting the inquiry on his own mere motion. Dr. NICHOLL considered that the Bishop was from his position the most fitting person with whom the inquiry should originate. Mr. WARBURTON would withdraw the amend ment, but he would divide against the clause. The question being then put that the clause should stand part of the Bill, Mr. WARBURTON moved the omission of the clause. Lord MORPETH hoped that the Hon. Member would not divide the House on the subject, but would allow the Chairman to report progress. Mr. WARBURTON felt it his duty to persevere in dividing the house upon the clause. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but no di vision took place. The House resumed, and the Chairman then re ported progress. The Militia Ballot Suspension Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow, The Militia Pay Bill was read a second time, and or dered to be committed. The Notices of Election Bill was reported, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. PAROCHIAL ASSESSMENTS BILL. On the question that the Report on this Bill should be agreed to, _ _ . Captain PECHELL moved that the words 51. should be struck out of the 4th clause, and the words 20s. inserted, the Hon. and Gallant Member consider ing that 51. was too heavy a penalty. Mr. P. SCROPE had already lowered the penalty from 201. to Si., and be considered that the clause would be inoperative if the penalty was further reduced. After a few words from Mr. HODGES and Captain PECHELL, the amendment was withdrawn. The Report was then agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. The second reading of the Coal Duties' Bill was postponed till to-morrow, as was also the third reading of the Railways Bill. BOROUGH OF BIRMINGHAM. On the motion of Mr. F. MAULE, the House re solved itself into a Committee, in which the Hon. Mem ber proposed a resolution, on which he intended to found a Bill, to enable the Lords Commissioners of the Trea sury to advance money to provide for the administration of justice in the borough of Birmingham. The Report was ordered to be received to-morrow. JOHN THOROGOOD. Lord MORPETH, in the absence of Lord J. Rus sell, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Act for the Better Regulation of Ecclesiastical Courts in England. The Act was only intended for one object, which was to enable the Court which committed Mr. Thorogood to discharge him with the consent of the parties at whose complaint be was committed. After a few observations from Dr. NICHOLL, Mr. H. VERNON said he thought it was compe tent for the Judge of the Ecclesiastical Court to order the discharge of a person in contempt, for not obeying its monition, without the present Act. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said they had been told by the Learned Judge himself that he had no power, and that therefore the Act became necessary. After a few observations from Mr. EASTH OPE, leave was given to bring in the Bill. Dr. NICHOLL obtained leave to bring in a Bill to alter and amend the law regarding process upon con tempts in the Courts Ecclesiastical in England and Ire land, and to facilitate the discharge of persons who now are, or hereafter may be, in custody for contempt of any of such Courts. On the motion of Sir C. DOUGLAS, returns of wheat sold in Mark-lane since the Ist day of May to the 24th of July inclusive, and similar returns from Liverpool for the same period, were agreed to. Lord MORPETH obtained leave to briug in a 13111 to amend an Act of the second and third years of the reign of her present Majesty, intituled, " An Act to make further provisions relating to the Police in the dis trict of Dublin Metropolis." These several Bills having been brought in, and the other Orders of the Day disposed of, the House ad journed at Half-past Ten o'Clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 30. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the wool• sack at Five o'Clock. Mr. BERNAL and others from the Commons brough up the Loan Societies Bill and several other Bills. BEER BILL. On the motion of Lord WHARNCLIFFE, the Beer Bill went through a Committee and was ordered to be reported to-morrow. Viscount DUNCANNON moved the second read ing of the Shrewsbury and Holyhead Roads Bill. After a few words - from the Duke of WELLINGTON and Lord MONTEAGLE, the Bill was read a third time and ordered to be committed to-morrow. _ _ The Peddle River (Dublin) Bill was read a second time. Viscount DUNCAN N 0 N moved the second reading of the Metropolis improvement Bill, briefly stating its objects, which were to form three new lines of streets in various parts of the metropolis. The improvements were of the most desirable nature, and he trusted there would be no opposition to the Bill. The Earl Of • RIPON regretted that the Bill had been bought up at so late a period of the Session, as they had no means of ascertaining whether the parties whose properties would be affected by the measure were assenting to it. He admitted that the objects were very laudable, and that the sum (300,0001.) required for the purpose was not very large. Lord COLBORNE thought some inquiry was ne cessary before they passed a measure which would in terfere so much with the value of property. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. The Court-Houses (Ireland) Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed to morrow. MUNICIPAL DISTRICTS BILL (IRELAND). Viscount DUNCANNON moved the second read ing of the Municipal Districts (Ireland) Bill. It em braced the three points to which the attention of their Lordships had been called on a former occasion, namely, the compensation clause, the clause affecting the boun daries, and the clause relative to maximum of rating. Lord LYNDHURST said the Bill did not affect his Bill in any way. Lord BROUGHAM did not think his Noble and Learned Friend had acted with his usual candour, be cause throughout he had entirely and completely his own way. They had endeavoured to prevail upon their Lordships to pass the first bill, but they had been defeated by a considerable majority. His Noble and Learned Friend then intimated, that unless cer tain amendments were agreed to in the Muni cipal Corporation Bill, he would oppose it on the third reading. He (Lord Brougham) thought he had heard his Noble and Learned Friend say also that he would be disposed to take the same course, unless another measure were to be propounded by her Majesty's Government, and he began to be alarmed in consequence of an answer given by the Noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Govern ment, that it was not his intention to bring in any such measure. The Duke of WELLINGTON was glad this Bill was on the eve of passing, and hoped no ill-advised con test would take place that evening, but that an end would be put to the subject altogether. Lord BROUGHAM said he should be mortified if any concession it was able to make was not made to enable the Bill to pass. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said the only point was not whether the separation of districts should take place, but as to the mode of providing for the sec tions after separation, and whether it should be done by Juries or by the Town Council. He was of the latter opinion, but he did not think the difference sufficient to delay the settlement of a measure of the greatest im portance to Ireland.--( Hear, hear.) The Earl of HADDINGTON expressed his re gret at the rejection in another place of a clause he had suggested to his Noble Friend, allowing the officers of the present Corporation three months' time for resig. nation, when, if they resigned, they would, like other parties, receive compensation. It was not, he admitted, recommended by its general principle, but, under the cir cumstances of the case he thought it a proper protection to the parties concerned. It was a clause which would have passed if a Municipal Corporation Bill had passed in 1838. After a few words from Lord Duncannon, Lord Car bery, and Lord Lyndhurst, The Bishop of EXETER said that under ordinary circumstances he should not address their Lordships On a subject like the present. But this measure affected the Protestant interest in Ireland. The question was not whether or not this Bill was in conformity with the Bill adopted by the Noble and Learned Lord, but the first consideration was, whether or not the Bill con tained provisions unjust in themselves, and would load to consequences their Lordships would deeply deplore. He was sure. the statement the Noble and EVENING EDITION. Learned Baron had made showed (if it was correct, and it was not denied), that their Lordships, by the operation of this Bill, would nfrect the Protestant interest in Ire hind by extending the power of voting as settled by the Reform Bill. He hoped therefore their Lordships would do their duty and reject the Bill. After a short conversation the Bill was read a second time. NEW SOUTH WALES. The Bishop of EXETER said he had moved for some papers relative to New South Wales, and they had all been presented save one. He wished to know why that one had not been presented ? The Mlrquis of LANSDOWNE could not tell why it had not been presented, but would inquire, Petitions were presented by the Bishop of EXETER against the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Bill. The Bishop of LONDON presented petitions from the clergy of Colchester, and from the rural deanery of Sydenham against the rating of Stock in Trade Bill. He regretted that a Bill which so seriously affected the interests of the clergy, and which was very like a fraud upon them, should have been introduced at so late a period of the Session. Lord PORT:NIA N said the statements of the Right Rev. Prelate, if uncontradic'ed, would naturally excite the indignation of their Lordships against the Bill, but it affected the interests of all the classes of the commu nity as well as in the Church. When the time for dis cussing the provisions of the Bid arrived, he would undertake to show their Lordships that it by no means deserved the character of fraud and injustice which the Right Reverend Prelate had ascribed to it. The Bishop of LONDON denied that he had im puted any intention of fraud to those who introduced the Bill. Al that the clergy required was that a tem porary measure only should be passed this year, so as to give time for a full consideration. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that the clergy had no reason to complain in this matter. Their property was always liable to be rated ; and the present mea sure was brought in solely to remove the difficulties which were found in giving effect to the law. After a few words from Lord AsHanaroN, a nd from Lord PORTMAN in explanation, the conversation dropped. .THE BRITISH LEGION (SPANISH AUXILIARIES). In answer to a question from the Marquis of LON• DONDERRY, Lord MELBOURNE said that all the papers con nected with the arrangement which hadbeen made for the payment of the claims of the British Auxiliary L e gion (Spanish) would be laid on the table of the House, and they would contain all the information which could be desired on the subject. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was not at all satisfied with the answer, but considered it one of those evasions of which there had been too many in the course of this business. He now begged to ask the Noble Viscount if any authentic information respecting the in' surrection at Barcelona had been received ; and further, whether it was true, as publicly stated, that the Order of the Bath had been conferred upon Espartero ? If so, he was at a loss to understand whether the honour was conferred for that General's treachery in inducing Maroto to desert from his King, or for his more recent treachery to his Queen. Lord MELBOURNE said that no precise informs . " tion had been received respecting the occurrences re ported to have taken place at Barcelona. To the se' child question he could only answer that her Majesty had been advised to confer the honour alluded to o pt* the Duke of Vittoria. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented s petition from the diocese of Durham against the Eccle' siastical Duties and Revenues Bill. He strenuous l l supported the petition, and said that the revenues of the Archdeaconry of Durham were not sufficient for the spiritual wants of the diocese. He appealed to the Rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Durham), to bear him out as to the extent of spiritual destitution in that die• cese. 13,0001. had already been abstracted from the revenues, and it would be most unjust to take an y more from them. The Bishop of DURHAM confirmed the statemen t of the Noble Marquis, and made some further observe- tions in support of the petition, which were not bear d in the ~a llery. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented Pe' titions from Maidstone and the diocese of Canterbury' against the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Bil l; also a petition from Southwark against the Metrobolis Improvement Bill. Viscount STRANGFORD said a report had he_ e ° afloat for some days in the public J ourna l s o f ow country and France, that a formal diplomatic arrad e i ment had been concluded between this country a ° certain great Continental Powers, for the purpose t/ c i settling the question at issue between Turkey a ° Egypt, and that to that arrangement France was not 11 consenting or a signing p ar ty. H e did not w i sh to ask anything of the nature or provisions of the ar range" ment. All he wished t o l earn f rom t h e Noble Viscount' was the simple fact of its existence or noo.existen e e; The report had created considerable uneasiness , an d had had an effect upon the state of the public funds. Viscount MELBOURNE sa id t h at i t was cer tainly true that negotiations had been carried on betwee n Great Britain, Austria, Russia, Prussia, and the Subli me Porte, to pacify m a tters i n th e L evant . Th e se neget' , tions had been carried on and were cons id era bl y advanced' but matters of that kind could not be considered as settled, until ratified. It was quite certain, however, that these negotiations had made considerable progress. Lord BROUGHAM asked whether it was tr ll er a not as reported, that no communication whatever l a. been made to Fran c e, o r it s R e p resen t at i ve , on 01 7 subject of these negotiati ons , un til a f ter th e pe riod 0 ` the completion of that treaty. Lord MELBOURNE sa id it certa i n l y was th eir wish to concur with France on this subject, but it 0 . 1 also certainly true that F rance was not a party to thi' arrangement. Lord BROUGHAM said, all he could then do' ti f stronglytporeesxsptreeosssatrsoealy, his d as heregret could,rre on the and he subject.cou could not ECCLESIASTICAL DUTIES AND RE VENUES BILL. The Bishop of EXETER presented a Pet i t ) : from the Dean and Chapter of Exeter, 1) 10 ' h -- that the " Prebendaries of the Church might -8 preserved, and that in addition to the four residentia l° . proposed by the Bill, two more should be set a part f°' t the Archdeacons. Also a petition from Wales aga l° „ 9 c the Bill, and a petition from 654 clergymen of differ e ,w s dioceses, praying that if the revenues of the ca nonn b e s were applied to other purposes, the offices migh t preserved, with the framework of our cathedral bodie in their integrity. On the Order of the D a y f or go i ng i n t o C om mitte e on the Ecclesiastical Duties an d R evenues Bill / 3 ' l° ' read, The Bishop of EXETER said before the quest i e r was put he would tresp a s s f or a f ew Onutes on th e :f Lordships' indulgence. H e did no t p resen t hims elf the other night becaus e o f th e l a t e h our t o w hich th d discussion bad extended, and because he wished to affb r the opportunity to others who were much better, i ,e a ; titled to their Lordships' att e nti on th an himself. 11 could not, however, consistently with his sense of duty's suffer this occa s i o n t o p ass w i t h ou t s t at i ng t h e rens°.% which rendered it imp era ti ve on hi m to rests in every sh a p e the Bill on t h e i r L or d s hi ps ' tabl e ' After the decision of the last ni g ht, h e s h ou ld co nside r it vexatious to trouble their Lordships with a divisioa, but he should certainly feel it his duty to state the rt e : sons why he could not agree with it. It was , h e t h o ug f " extremely hard that upon a Bill which so deeplY: of fected the interests of a large body of the clergy' t""_' had never had an opportunity afforded them of exPr h es T r ing their opinions upon it till it was actually u h ir c r pr t ; t i j e Lordships' table. Since then, however, they plainly expressed their opinions lapon it ; indeed, he believed no petitions had been presented in the Bill unless a few lately from the Corporation 01 Minor Canons , lie understood that in the o ther 11 °1 there were petitions from not less than 3,000 or 4,00 0 0 the clergy, and he knew not why duplicates of these petitions had not been forwarded to their LordshlP 9 f House. There ;Ira% one petition from the clergy Lincoln, which exhibited pretty strongly the hostility, of might so term it, with which the cicrgy g eneral viewed the measure. Indeed the great body of t i b i a e clergy of the Established Church were decidedly favour of opposed to it. During the administration of Earl Gr e Y; a plan of Cathedral reform, Similar to the present, was proposed, and the Bishops were convened to p r ononc e bt their opinio n u p on it. I t was advocated by the Rev. Prelate who supported the present measure of form, and he would remind their Lordships that ol two others agreed with the Ri g ht R ev . Prelate in his advocacy of the measure, and it was ultimately shad, Boned. That would, he believed, afford their Lor bs ships a sufficient indication o f t h e sent i men ts of Bishops upon the present plan ; and with these opici°, ° o : recorded at the instance of th e P r i mate an d the ur e , b vernment, staring them is th e f ace , a plan in all re spects essentially the sam e was now attemp t e d to r ., forced upon the •clergy and the country. He was V a d prised now to find the Most Rev. Primate, wh° , a t agreed with the majority o f t h e Bi s h ops u pon i " o occasion, putting his hand to and recommending of plan so diametrically opposed to the resolutions as the Bishops. He did not think that that yi d, the way in which the Bishops should be tres,at te_ When he heard o n a ll s id es t h e authority of the I‘ P Rev. Primat e quo t e d i n f avour o f the p i resent measure, he certainly f e lt it hi s d uty to ma k e t h a t s tatemen t, . b order to show that his judgment was not that wV il l should be most con fid ent l y re li e d upon . If the t he was in its character calculated to deteriorate from utility of the Church, he thought that must be co.n cb dered as a great se t- o ff aga i ns t any a d v antages vvr" a f might be derived from supplying the spiritual wanots_s, the country. The great object and principle of the sin cure was to do away with what were termed the r . , cure offices of the Church, providing for the due t hat formance of Divine service ; now, he maintained. 11 , these were not sinecures in the ordinary sense e r l for ' ra, word. These clergymen had certain duties tc, ) ,,,f e e or gu-' and they could not be said to be sine curt. tnent Meas State wee, Vantn th e ro lls) Lure, the C th e , To Eituat Which eonfe l Ag a i r shouli that I those one of