The Sun. — London, England, 1840-05-06 00:00:00

___, EVENING EDITION. Yet they wore for the continuance of the system. He believed that the colonial s3s.in ha , l generally an-I Signally succeeded.—(Cries of" No, no.") It had been said that the colonies would be more benefited by the immigration of free labourers. He did not undervalue the importance of that immigration, but he did not think it would be sufficient to supersede the necessity for convict labour. But it had also been said, that the employment of convict labour prevented the immigration of respectable settlers. But the contrary was the fact. It was found by experience that it had no such effect. He trusted that no one would suppose that ha advocated the abuses which had been complained of. But he did not think that the Whole system of transportation should be con demned on account of the abuses; and he deeply regretted that the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) did not apply himself to remove the abuses instead of abandoning the system. The inequality of suffering occasioned by the punishment, was not con lined to transportation. Take the least of all punishments, a Pecuniary fine. Did it not press upon different individuals with great inequality ? Indeed the same was true of every other kind of punishment. The transportation which he advocated should be continued with such moral and reli gious regulations as would provide for the improvement of the convicts. Even under the present system (bad as was) many convicts had been enabled by the tickets of leave to return to honest and industrious habits before the expiration of the period of their transportation, and not unfrequeatly they had afterwards risen to worth and r espectability-. It had been said that the knowledge of these instances tended to weaken the effect of transporta tion in deterring from crime. But under the system of imprisonment in this country, the convict was shut out from the possibility of reformation. It was declared by the Inspectors of Prisons, that the discharged Prisoners had the greatest difficulty in finding employment, and were on that account for the most part compelled to return to dishonest courses. He was convinced that the proposed plan would not have any effect in producing the r eformation of offenders, but would tend, in this country as in France, to let loose periodically upon the public, the most desperate criminals. The Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) ought to hesitate before he aba doned the system Which had been laid down by Pitt, and under which the colonies of Australia had extended and flourished in a manner unexampled in any age or history. air. WARD observed that the Noble Lord who had just sat down had stated this was not a party question. Undoubtedly it was not, otherwise, instead of the speech of his Hon. Friend ( Sir W. Molesworth) which he must Sa y, exhibited deep research, close reasoning, and a tho rough acquaintance with every fact, having been listened to by almost an empty house--the Noble Lord at one time having been nearly the solitary representative of his P„,artY—the benches opposite would have been crowded. The system of transportation was a system that was ra dically wrong. If they wished to encourage .free emi gration, they must suppress that which contaminated the "lolly. He very much agreed with the sentiments ex pressed in a petition which had been presented during the present Session by his Hon. Friend, the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, and which was signed by six members of the Legislative Council, 57 Justices of the Peace, four Clergy- Men, and :355 landowners of New South Wales. The whole tendency of that petition was, that the House should prepar e the way for a free system of emigration. The want of labourers in these colonies was felt extremely, which might have been remedied by sending out emi grants. It however unfortunately happened, that in the Ter- e , eear the assignment system was, as the Noble Lord tad told them, to cease, the Colonial Office had not a shilling to spend in colonising New South Wales. What had become of that fund which would have en abled the Colonial Office to send out 10,000 emigrants as it did last year? Why the fact was that the whole fund had been diverted from its proper purpose, and had bademployed t o d e f ra y th e ex p enses o f pr i sons , an d nad been diverted from the purposes of emigration for w hich alone it was intended. He thought that his Hon. Friend the Member for Leeds was entitled to the thanks of the country for bringing the subject forward, let the result of the motion be what it might. Ma. C. BULLER thought, with all the objections that had been made to the system of assignment, it was the only mode of keeping up transportation with any effect. He considered that his Hon. Friend, the Member for Leeds, was inclined to take too sweeping a view of the state of the penal colonies. No one could deny sonic of the inferences which had been drawn by the Hon. Member for Leeds ; but he could not agree that transportation into New South Wales was useless, and ought to be abolished. The system of transportation to New South Wales had converted more criminals to honest courses than any other means. Many had become reformed, and good members of society. He thought, however, that New South Wales had become so wealthy and well-settled, that they could no longer continue it as a penal settlement. Free labour was now its chief reliance, for in place of 3,000 convicts annually, the last two years they had sent out 10,000 annually of free labourers—it was now their only resource. Emigra tion must therefore be encouraged, and in order to do so they must give up the sending of convict labour. How ever, even that would not do—the people there were most anxious for popular institutions—they were most desirous of representation, and so were thousands in this country, Who were anxious to emigrate if such a free government were given to the colony. The Governor had now the Power of ruining any man by depriving him of the whole of his convict labour. Sir G. Arthur did so to one man, and in one day totally ruined him, for his flocks, &c., were ren dered absolutely useless. This was too much power to give to any Governor. He thought the time was now come When the colony ought to have these free institutions, and then they might fearlessly look the question of the aboli tion'of transportation boldly in the face. He was very happy to hear the liberal and enlightened views of the Noble Lord, but when he was prepared to give up so much he did not see why he should keep up any part of it at all. He ,was very sorry indeed that the Government had so robbed the emigration fund—( Hear, hear)—perhaps he had used too strong a term—he would say misappropriated these funds. Certainly no Government ever gave a stronger assurance that that fund would be held sacred for the purposes of sending out emigrants.—( H ear .) Lord Goderich's despatch to Sir J. Bourke recommended the application of the funds derived from the sale of lands to the purposes of emigration, and yet during the last year the whole of the emigration fund had been applied to the service of the Government. That was a violation of an express arrangement which had been entered into with the Colonial Government, and the withdrawal of convict labou r at the same time gave the colonists at least very good reason to c o mplain. He trusted that that state of tu ings would not long be permitted to remain without a remedy. Mr. HAWES thought the House was much indebted to the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Leeds, for the man ner.in which he had brought the question before it. There was a collateral subject connected with the one imme diately before the House, which he thought deserving of the attention of the Government. He meant the large convict establishments at the Hulks, which were out of the control of the Inspectors of Prisons, and presented an a nomaly in the general system of discipline which pre vailed in the prison establishments of the country. He would suggest to the Noble Lord (J. Russell) the pro- Priety of having some large buildings erected in the neigh bourhood of the hulks, where more accommodation, and a better system of discipline could be provided for the eon- Hear, hear.) IN fr. V. SMITH did not thi n k th a t t h e present system of tr ansportation had been productive of that moral im provement, which w ou ld recommen d i t to t h e cons id erat i on of any Government. With regard to the quest ion of Migration, which was in some degree connected with the Present subject, as it wou ld b e s h ort l y b roug h t b e f ore the ,tionse, he would no t enter at any l engt h i nto i t, nor d i d Ile think it would be fair to mix it up with the present ation, as t h ere were so many other considerations in volved i n i t . Th e G overnment could not be justly charged Wi th , a viol a ti on o f t h e p l e d ge w i th which they had been t he b y the lion. Member for Li s k ear d, w i t h regar d to 'lle devotion of the land funds to emigration. lie would n ot detain the House any longer at that hour on this sub ject, however important it was. He thought that the Legislature ought to be guided by considerations for the welfare of the mother country and the colonies equally, and.not take the part of either exclusively. Mr. HUTT said that the Government had distinctly pledged itself in 1836 that the money derived from the sales of land should be exclusively devoted to promoting emigration, and a proposal to devote those funds to that purpose by legislative enactment, was opposed as supero gators,. How had the Government redeemed this pledge? Why only last year they had abstracted 300,0001. from this fund, and devoted it to other purposes. Under these cir cumstances was it surprising that acerbity should be felt in the colonies, and expressed in that House ? They had no more right to take money from the emigration fund to build prisons, to pay police, or to give on outfit to Capt. Hodson to New Zealand, than they had to build a new Palace in the Park. or give a new pension to Lord Spring Rice. —( A laugh.) He did not believe the Noble Lord would devote those funds to improper purposes, but other Ministers might arise less scrupulous, and who would t amper with it for the most improper purposes. Mr. LABOUCHERE h a d not last year pledged the G overnment to devote, under all circumstances, the entire Proceeds of the fund to emigration ; he had stated that it Wa s desirable the proceeds of the fund should be de votaied, as f ar as poss ibl e , t o th a t purpose, but that the M ntenan ce of society must be kept up in that colony; 0 11 if the inhabitants would not tax th emse l ves i n any er way for that purpose, it was the duty of the Govern_ T ent to d evote a p or tion of that fund t o suc h purposes.. le thought the protection of the aborigines was a charge \ ';hich, i n t h e fi rst p l ace , oug ht t o b e d e f raye d, and that tno establishment of courts of justice and of the police was a charg e which it was right should be defrayed by the ()1 9 11 Y ; and if the colonists would not take an cnlargcti e; those of th ese su bj ec t s , an d pr o vide means for d e f ra yi rei 1121 se charges, so as to devote the whole of this fund tt !migratio n then it was the duty of the Government tc defray those charges out of that Lund in the first instance,. isthe mot h er country cou ld not j us tly b e ca ll e d u p on \1 . d efray those expenses for the colony,—( Hear, hear. ) regard to the colony of South Australia, the govert Purposes body there, finding that they wanted money for th e r .lr P°ses of government, claimed the right of appropri - 4t mg the proceeds of the sale of lands for the object i,a loiestion, and he thought they were justed in so doing.. th l e Right Hots. Gentleman concluded by repeating that the Government had not held out any prospects which. e had after war d s renounce d, an d w hi c h t h ey were no t. still ready to adhere to. t M. HUTT sa id, i n exp l anat i on, that he did not svisir o attribut e to t h e Ri g h t Hon. Gentleman who had just Te t 4 , s t down, any a b andonment of former principles, but lie o °o ught he h a d m i sta k en t h e nature of' the question, as it r elated to South Australia. Sir NV . MOL ES WORTH, in reply said that he was• so rry the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) did not think it Proper to accede to h i s motion. As the Noble Lord. 2, 4 " not, h owever , expresse d himself decidedly opp ose d to , ` .. 1 1 e. motion, he ( Sir Wm. Mclesworth) hoped the period h t so on arr i ve when transportat i on might be abolished, . I_ l would not di v id e t h e H ouse on t h e motion, but het t w il o y u is l i d on l . eave it on the pipers of the House. . The moti on was t h en put , and negati ve d w i t h out a. LAW OF PILOTAGE, The Srr.Axrr then Icft Ow. (Trlir, Tarl the ticolF+o wen'. into Committ, wi,cn Mr. LABOUCHERE moved for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of an Act passed in the sixth year of the reign of King George the Fourth, intituled, " An Act for the amendment of the law respecting Pilots and ' Pilotage, and also for the better preservation of Floating Lights, Buoys, and Beacons," as exempts from penalty the master or mate of any ship or vessel, being the owner or part owner of such ship or vessel, and residing at Dover, Deal, or the Isle of Thanet, for piloting or conducting such, his own ship or vessel, in certain cases in the said Act mentioned. His object now was only to ask the House to go into Com mittee, as abundant opportunities would occur for the dis cussion of its principles. The motion was agreed to without observation. DUTIES ON IMPORTS. Mr. HLTME moved that a Select Committee be ap pointed to inquire into the several duties levied on imports into the United Kingdom : and whether those duties are for protection to similar articles the produce or manufac ture of this country, or of the British possessions abroad, and to what extent such duties afford protection, or whether the duties are for the purposes of revenue. Lord G. SOMERSET asked whether the motion re ferred to the Corn-laws. Mr. LABOUCHERE did not imagine the object of the Hon. Gentleman was to go into so wide a field as that referred to by the Noble Lord. Mr. HUME assented. His object was simply to show what duties were an undue incumbrance on trade. After a few words from Lord G. SOMERSET in re ply, the motion was agreed to. CANADA. Sir C. GREY moved, " That the copy of an Act of the Legislature of Upper Canada, intituled, An Act to provide for the Disposal of the Public Lands in this Pro vince, and for other purposes herein mentioned,' which was presented to this House on the Ist day of December 1837, be printed." The Right Hon. Gentleman, after making somewhat a tedious statement (about 11 o'clock, in a " House" of about thirty Members I) of the objects for which he desired the printing of the Act—startled the select few from their slumbering silence, by saying, " There are three points, Sir, for which I desire it"—an ominous division of the subject, which produced most ax pressive murmurs, dreadfully anticipative of a long and heavy speech—the expectation of which was abundantly fulfilled—for Sir Charles, just throwing in a parenthetical assurance that he would " not say five words," proceeded to enter with undisturbed equanimity, and impregnable self possessian—with most somnolent heaviness—and with wearying minuteness—into all the three " heads"—dividing and subdividing each in torturing particularity ; the best of the joke being, that, in the earnestness of his discourse, he was utterly unconscious that the only effect of the prosy harangue was to set every one (not asleep) a-laugh ing. At last, after touching rather irrelevantly on every conceivable topic referring or not referring to Canada, lie wound up very welcomely by a recapitulation of his three " heads," and a confident assertion that his motion would not be opposed. Lord J. RUSSELL assented to this, dryly and quietly observing, that he did not think it necessary to enter into the highly momentous topics to which his lion. Friend had adverted somewhat unnecessarily. SUPPLY. Mr. B ERNA L brought up the Report of the Com mittee cri Supply, which was agreed to. EXCHEQUER BILLS BILL. The Eouse then went into Committee upon the Exche quer BilJs Bill, 11,000,000/. On the question that the amendment be inserted, Mr. WILLIAMS said that, without blaming the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he must object to the practice of bringing such Bills into Committee, and passing them without being printed and placed i 3 the hands of Members, like other Bills. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER saidthat the object of the Bill was to give the power of renewing the Exchequer Bills, which would fall due in June next. The Bill was then passed through Committee, and the Report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow. IMPORTATION OF FLOUR (IRELAND.) On thse motion of Mr. LABOUCHERE, the Impor tation of Flour (Ireland) Bill was passed through Com mittee, a.nd the Report was ordered to be resumed on Friday. In answer to Mr. JONES, Mr. LABOUCHERE said that he would not bring on the thin d reading of the Bill at so late an hour of the night, c,r without giving due notice to Hon. Members con nected with Ireland, who had expressed an intention of opposing. it in that stage. The House then adjourned at Half-past Eleven o'Clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, MAr 5. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at a Quarter to Five o'Clock. Earl FITZ WILLIAM presented a petition for the better observance of the Lord's Day; and several peti tions from Sheffield, for the abolition of Church-rates, and the liberation of John Thorogood. Lord RALEIGH presented a number of petitions from various parts of England and Wales against alteration of the Corn -laws, Lord %V YNFORD presented a petition from Canada, praying i 'or the preservation of the rights of the Esta blished C liurch in that colony. The Noble and Learned Lord pre smted also several petitions respecting the opera tion of t no Poor-laws. The I fis.hop of LONDON presented petitions from the Church' vardens: of Islington and other parishes in London and its:vici nity, praying for increased means of suppressing Sunday trAing. The petitioners stated in consequence of the altered valv.e of money since the passing of the Act of Charles IL for the suppression of Sunday trading, the fines provided by the Act were too insignificant to operate as a check.. Th e Bishop of LINCOLN presented a petition from Lincoln a gainst any further grant to the Popish College of Alaynth 3th. The Bishop of EXETER, presented petitions in favour of Church Extension,Jrom the clergy and inhabitants of various pl aces in Northumberland, Cornwall, Somerset, Chester, ; 3uffolk, and Gloucester. The Bi shop of LL AND AFF presented a petition to the same !fleet from a place in Glamorganshire. The Earl of WINC HIL SE A presented a petition from a p Lace in Yorkshire, against any further grant to to the College of Maynooth. The Noble Earl also pre sented pa titions against the Irish Municipal Bill, and against the Canada Clergy Reserves Bill, from places which we could not learn, in consequence :of the low tone in we ich he spoke. The: Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from a board of guardians in Middlesex against rating stock in trade, vaying their Lordships to revise the law on the subject. Also a petition from the solicitors of Banffshire against t ;he Law of Evidence Bill. Also petitions from Aberdeen, and a place in Inverr,esshire, against the intru sion of dinisters to the Scottish Church. Also a petition from the guardians of the Eastbourne union, praying that the establish resent of Assistant Poor-law Commissioners might be hems fter dispensed with. The Noble Duke, however, did not saoincide in the object of that prayer. Earl G AL LO WA Y presented a petition from a place in Scotlai id against the intrusion of Ministers. Lord A SHBU RT ON presented a petition from From e, we believ c, against the trade in opium. The Noble Lord said that the subject was one on which the opinion o f the country was much divided, and he wished 1,0 direct attention for a moment to it. Of course , it was well known that an expedition was fitting out again it China, but he believed that never before was there an t xpedition of such a strength, or one in the;result of which the public mind was more interested, and of which so little information had been afforded by the Go vernment. He was quite ignorant, and he believed the public also were as ignorant, of whether that expedition was to a 'mist of 1,000 men or of 10,000—of one or of ms my ships of wzr. Upon those points he would mu&?h like to have some information from the Noble Viscount opposite. It might be probable that the Noble Lord wind d think it inconsistent to give answers upon these pc iints;, but there was one subject which it was most desirabl.e to have some information upon, and, as it could be giv en without any detriment to the public service, he truste d he would receive an answer to his question from the Noble Viscount. It was well known that that axpedition must be armed with the power of institut ing Courts for the condemnation of reprisals, as also with a poser to carry on difficult and nice negociations : he wan' .ed to know under whose guidance that expedition was to be placed ? !L.,ord M E LBOURNE—The general conduct of the ex pediticn would most undoubtediy be placed in the hands of the Noble Lord the Governor-General of India. Lord ASHBURTON—WiII he accompany thc expc dit ion ? Lord MELBOURNE—No, no. The Earl of RIPON—WiII the Noble Lord act under i nt;tructions from the Home Government? Viscount NIEL B OURNE—Of course the Noble Lord kill act upon instructions from home, but he will also act ander the circumstances as they arise, and as may be necessary without waiting for instructions from home. Lord ASHBURTON—My question has not yet been answered—Was the expedition to be under a single Corn. mander, who would also conduct the negotiation? Lord MELBOURNE—The naval officer will conduct the negotiatimi, I apprehend. Lord ASHBURTON—AdmiraI Elliott? Lord MELBOURNE—Yes. The Earl of STANHOPE presented petitions on the subject of Socialism and in favour of Church Extension ; a petition from Southampton, deprecating the war with China as likely to be productive of calamity and dis honour. Also petitions from Down, in Ireland, and La naikshire, in Scotland, praying that measures might be adopted for the suppression of the growth of opium. Earl FITZWILLI A M had a number of petitions to present on the subject of the Corn-laws, and there was one in particular to which he wished to call the attention of their Lordships. Ile knew not, in deed, whether some technical objection might not be taken to it, as it bore the signature of a Noble Earl who had been taken from that House by the hand of death. The petition was from the Chamber of Commerce of Pk mouth, and was signed, among others, by the late Earl of Morley as Chairman. It prayed for the total and immediate abolition of the Corn-laws. He had also to present similar petitions from Doncaster and Market Harborough, which proved that the desire for an alteration in these laws teas not confined to manu facturing districts. The Marquis of SALISBURY would suggest to the Noble Earl the inconvenience of discussing a question like the Corn-liws on every occasion.—( Hear, hear.) Lord A SHBURTON made a few observations which were inaudible in the gallery. Earl FIT ZW ILIA AM said his notice stood for TUC3_ day the 26th, tut he confessed it would be more conve nient to himself to postpone it till Thursday the 28th, and as it might be convenient to their Lordships to know what the terms of his motion would be, he would state it. He would move, "That it is expedient to reconsider the laws which regulate the trade in Foreign corn : " After a conversation across the table the Noble Earl again rose, and said that he understood Thursd:y, the TIIE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 1840. 28th inst., was a day on which the House was not likely to Kit t hild ihereff ahe would d 'ruesdlv,thP ` 6 tb Trri ll7, CO' The 'Marquis of SALIIATRY wished to know whether the Noble Marquis (Lansdowne) had any obj'c tion to refer the Tithe Commutation Bill to a Select Corn mittce up stairs? The Marquis of LANSDOWNE had no objection to do so. legiJative sanction for the Vcto or some other equivalent " 0 pl'eceeditigs 11.4 d si;wc taken place, which Consequ,..- I n 01.0 district, rcrilote from his (Lord Aberdeen's) residence, but more immedi ately connected with the possessions of his Noble Friend on the cross benches (the Duke of Richmond), dissent was pronounced against a gen tl eman w h o was p re sented to a parish, and the Presbytery was prohibited by the Commis sion of the tkssembly from receiving that gentleman for - - The Bill was then ordered to be referred to a Select Committee up stairs, and the Committee, on the motion of the Marquis of Lansdowne, was appointed. LORD SEATON. On the motion oe Viscount DUNCANNON, Lord Seaton's Annuity Bill went through a Committee, and was ordered to be read a third time on Thursday next. NON.INTRUSION (SCOTLAND). The Earl of ABERDEEN rose to call the attention of the House to the question of Non-Intrusion in the Scottish Church. The Noble Earl said, in doing so he should apologise to their Lordships while attempting to bring in a Bill on a subject of so much importance. He could assure the Pouse that his doing so did not arise from any newly-acquired confidence on his part, or from any notion of his not standing in need of their Lordships' indulgence, but from a conviction that this subject now in dispensably demanded the interference of the Legislature, and also from circumstances connected with the subject which in some degree compelled him personally to follow the course which he was now about to adopt. After all that had taken place—after the decla rations made by the Noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government, at the end of last Session of Parliament, and again at the opening of the present Session, and at repeated intervals since, it was undoubtedly his belief and persuasion that her Majesty's Government would have found it incum bent on them to have attempted to apply a remedy to those evils of which they fully admitted the existence and the magnitude. Noble Lords, however, had thought it consistent with their duty to abstain from any proceeding, and they were certainly the best judges of the course they should follow. At the same time, he would say that in a case which involved the peace and tranquillity of an im portant portion of the country, in a case in which the au thority of the law was at stake, and in which was placed in jeopardy the welfare, or perhaps the existence of the most important interests and institutions of the country—in such a case he did think it might have been expected that the executive government would have found it proper and neces sary to undertake to afford a remedy for acknowledged evils. The Noble Lords knew well he never looked at this as a the purpose of ordination. The Commission was any num ber of the body which chose to meet together during the adjournment after the usual sitting. This Commission prohibited the Presbytery from taking this gentleman for trial; but the Presbytery having been aware of the judg ment of this House, and consequently of the law of the land, were placed in this difficulty—that they were pre vented bv their Ecclesiastical superiors from obeying the law ; and, on the other hand, they would be liable to au action for damages if they did not act in conformity with the judgment of the House. Accordingly, they respect fully declined to comply with the Commission, and took the gentleman into trial. The Commission, upon this, suspended the seven ministers who were the majority of that Presbytery. The latter appealed to the Court of Session for protection. The Court of Session issued an interdict prohibiting any person from publishing the suspension of the ministers in the respective parishes, and another interdict prohibiting any per2on from being appointed to, or officiating in, the churches or parishes of those ministers. Both those interdicts were violated. Placards were distributed throughout the parishes, pub lishing the suspension of the ministers, and describing them as incapable of discharging the ecclesiastical duties, or baptising, or performing marriages. Not only on Sundays, bat every day during the week, those parishes were vi sited by other ministers, who performed the duties of the suspended clergy men . The feelings of the people were enlisted on either side—their passions were excited, and the greatest agitation and alarm prevailed. Those seven ministers were highly respectable men, but the religious ceremonies were performed in their parishes by others, who employed themselves in persuading the congrega tions that the Gospel had not been preached to them be fore as it ought to have been ; and thus, although forci ble possession had not been taken of the churches, the clergymen were suspended in their office, and were low ered in the estimation of their parishioners. Tne execu tion of the law in respect to those interdicts would have led to violence, perhaps to bloodshed. That was surely not a state of things which ought to be allowed to con tinue. But it was only the state of seven pa rishes at present, and it would extend indefinitely matter of party; they knew that any measure they pro posed, had it possessed the least possibility of carrying into effect the object desired, would have met with his cr.rdial snpport. He knew not if he taxed the candour of his Noble Friend (Lord Melbourne) when he expressed the hope that, under similar circum stances, the measure he was about to propose might be if matters were left to remain as they were. When the Noble Viscount opposite (Lord Melbourne) said that neither party would concede, and that it was better to leave them to themselves, surely he must have forgotten that this was a case in which the law was to be supported. The law had no passion—no prejudice.—( Hear, hear.) It was the right of the subject to demand redress, and the met with a like reception. At the same time he was not insensible of the inconvenience, and even danger, of at- Judges were bound to administer it without delay. The Courts had no option—they did not make th e l a w, neither tempting to legislate on a subject of this nature. He knew many difficult and delicate questions might be raised, which had been better left at rest, and which, although unforeseen at the time, might possibly lead to consequences of the utmost importance. He felt that his own position in dealing, with this question was sufficiently irksome, for notwithstanding the vital importance did their Lordships. Their: Lordships had only interpreted the law, and found that the Court of Session had done rightly. That was the state of things at present. The law could not be enforced, and nothing could regulate the matter but the interference of Parliament —( Hear, hear.) The Noble Viscount had talked of conceding. What could '.he Court. of Session concede ? What could the House of of this subject—notwithstanding the manner in which it had agitated and continued to agitate a great portion of the country, notwithstanding the man her in which it affected the feelings, passions, and preju dices of thousands, he despaired almost of bringing the conviction of this truth hone to their Lordships' breasts. When he remembered the nature of the subject he was about to submit to their Lordships, that it was the cause of the Presbytery, and the stability and welfare of Presby terian Church government that he was anxious to uphold and confirm, although he could not expect feelings of hos tility in the House, still it was impossible to look for any warm sympathy or cordial support and concurrence from a large portion of their Lordships. Nevertheless he thought it right to declare at once that he approached this subject with feelings of the most profound veneration for the na tional Church as established by law in Scotland.—( Hear, hear.) He adopted the emphatic language of a Commit tee of the House of Commons, who, in a report they pre-. sented not many years sgo,declared their conviction thatthere never was an institution which, at so little cost, had accom- Lends concede ? What could their Lordships do bu either legalize the veto, cr provide some suitable remedy ? He did not know that it was worth while to occupy the attention 01 the House with the subject of the veto after so much had been said upon it already, but he found about a fortnight ago that the Committee appointed by the General Assem bly to confer with her Majesty's Government had thought proper to publish to the world the plans which they sug gested. The Government, he thought, did very wisely in refusing to comply with the request of those gentlemen to legalize the veto. The pamphlet contained the Veto Act, and the modification which the Committee proposed, and to which they meant to adhere. He (Lord Aberdeen) would never agree to legalize the veto, and the Government did very right in ref using to do so. The veto was not proposed on the principle of election ; on the contrary, the persons by whom it was proposed stated that their o bj ect was to prevent the necessity of popular election. Now although he did not mean to support popular election, yet be ad mitted that it had its advantages, and if he were compe l le d o,choose, he would not hesitate to nave it in preference to plished so much good as the established Church of Scotland. That was a Church composed exclusively of active labourers in the vineyard of the Lord. It was a Church in which pluralities and non-residence were unknown. It was a Church in which such of their Lordships as had ❑ot the means of personally and locally knowing the blessed effects of its ministrations, were little competent to form an opinion of the manner in which it ought to be regarded and revered. It was true— most unfortunately true—that of late indications of in tolerance and fanaticism, had shoo n themselves. He remembered the old saying, that " New Pres bytery was but Old Priest writ large ;'' but he would only say that such portions of all insti tutions as were the work of human hands were liable to decay.—(Hear.) They might have expected that among those who had suffered so long and so severely from the scourge of persecution anything like the feeling of intolerance would hays been unknown ; but it was a peculiarity of the human mind, that men, even men who had suffered those very evils themselves, were little reluctant to inflict them on others. However, it was a subject of congratulation that there now could be no renewal of the dark scenes of former times. There was no doubt but that the members of the Church of Scotland would continue to be animated with zeal in the veto. What the Committee proposed was, in fact, capricious dissent—vithout reason—or perhaps for unwor thy reasons—perhaps for unscriptural reasons—but which must prevail over the deliberate judgment of the Church itself—to prevent the ordination of any man whom those persons might choose to proscribe.—( Hear.) To legalise the veto would be to strike a blow at the independence of the Church and its existence as an establishment. It would be inconsistent with the jurisdiction which ought here— in every Cnurch—to constitute a third power, which should say what persons should or should not receive ordination.— ( Hear, hear, hear.) Suppose any l a y tyrant had proposed that any such third authority should exist, what notion could there be of the indepen dence of that Church ? It was important to consider, that when they asked for the legalization of the veto, they used no qualifications ; and that if the right were restricted, its principle was altogether altered, for that claimed the iLsolute right of rejection, If those gentlemen asserted that this was a divine right, he could not understand how they reconciled it to their consciences to take their scats in the General Assembly under the statute law of the land, which was inconsistent with that divine tight. Now the present plan of those gentlemen to modify the law of veto (which, though inoperative, was still the law of the Church), by the introduction of this provision, was that no the cause of their great Master. Or that he entertained no doubt; but that they would see any of those disfigurations of doubt; but that they would not see any of those dlsfigurationsof feelings towards the Church of Scotland he must add, that he did so with feelings of sincere love and respect to the great mass of the people of that country. He remembered many years ago in that House the late Lord Liverpool using an expression, which al:hough somewhat Utopian, was nevertheless very significant. He declared his conviction that Scot land was the best conditioned country on the face of the earth. He (the Earl of Aberdeen) was afraid that since that time they had not done much to improve or . . person should be qualified to disapprove, who did not de clare that he was not actuated by factious motives, but by a conscientious regard for his own spiritual welfare, and for that of the congregation. He thought that declara tion was exceedingly objectionable, and would be an in sufficient protection.—( Hear.) When people were'excited they were naturally led on without being themselves aware of their own feelings, and might safely declare that they were not actuated by factious motives.—(Hear.) It was objectionable also es a sort of snare to the con se'.ences of persons making the declaration, and as open ing the door to a species of perjury._ ( Hear, hear.) The plan contained also this modification—" Provided maintain their claim to that distieetion. Still there was an intelligence and moral worth among the people of that country, which entitled them to their Lordships' regard and attention. Their Lordships boasted, and, perhaps, properly, of having diminished the military force in Ireland, and they adduced that as a proof of the tranquillity and good order that prevailed there, and they counted their reduction by regiments and by thou sands of men. He would take leave, however, to remind them that they had confided the peace and tranquillity of Scotland for many years, and in the worst of times, to a very few hundred men, and they had done so with success. --(Hear, hear.) That spoke volumes for the love of or ler and good feeling of the people of Scotland. It also :peke volumes for the efficiency of that moral and religious education they received. If there was anything on earth to which the people of Scotland were attached with the purest devotion, it was to their National Church, and with good reason. The reformation in Scotland was mainly accomplished by the people. Their Church was empha tically the Church of the people. Little assisted by the great and powerful, after a long struggle and great &di culties they succeeded in establishing that Church. Un like the Church of that country, which, after its first fiery struggle, met with little difficulties in after times, the Church of Scotland was, from the period of its first exist ence, for centuries, exposed to repeated difficulties and persecutions, and, in fact, it never enjoyed the coun tenance or support of the great and powerful. From the Revolution to 1690 it was a perpetual struggle with the people, who were not supported by the Govern ment, to establish a National Church. It was mature], therefore, that they should, considering how dearly they had purchased that Establishment—it was natural that they should cling to it with feelings of affection and venc always and be it enacted, that it shall be competent to and incumbent upon the patron and heads of families who say that such dissent proceeds from factious motives, and not from conscientious regard for the spiritual welfare of the dissentients and the congregation, and that they shall be required to prove the Caine to the satisfaction of the Presbytery." How difficult would it be to prove that motives were factious and malicious—( Hear, hear)—and in wha state would the parish be when it was necessary to resort to such a course of proof against the majority of the parishioners. N o thi ng could lead to so much bitterness, and herst-burnings, and endless mischief. The alteration was rather for the worse, and Government could not see anything in it to remove the objection to the present veto. With respect to the non-intrusion of ministers, he must say Ciat this was a very wide term, and had given rise to opposite and erroneous ideas. Ile, for one was opposed to the intrusion of any minister against the will of the congregation.—( Hear, hear.) But he interpreted the words in a different way from some other persons, and he must observe, that among the multi tude of petitions which he had presented on the subject, very few had prayed for the veto co ?zombie, but only for non-intrusion, leaving it to Parliament to consider in what way it was to interfere. He (Lord Aberdeen) understood the principle, as it was laid down by Melville, by Calvin, and by Ben, who certainly did not mean by it the ca pricious will of the congregation without any reason.— ( Hear, hear.) The interpretation which he put upon the term, was that which was adopted in the best days of the Church by Knox and by Melville, and was laid down specifically in the book of " Discipline." The next authority was that on which the advocates of the veto relied, viz., the 2d book of Discipline, framed in 1578, in which it was stated that no person be entered in ration. There was one other class of persons connected any office of the Church contrary to the will of the congrc with this subject of whom he felt bound to say a few gation, or without the voice of the eldership, meaning words—he alluded to the body of patrons of S c otland. t h e p res byt er y. By one of the recent Acts of the States He was not disposed to deny that fo r th e l a tt er o f S cot l a nd, o f 1649, which abolishes patronage, it was ad portion of the last century the right of p a t rons might milted that the Assembly had th powerto deal with the perhaps have been more strictly asserted, and th e j us t su bj ec t as t h e y th oug ht fit. Th e A ssem bly accordingly claims of the people might have been more ncgl :c s e d th an prepared a directory for the purpose,in which there via the support consistent with the welfare of the Church and th e this regulation—that if it appeared major ed the part oftla s . support of its religion. There could be no doubt that congregation dissented fr o m th e p erson agreed upon by during that period some diminution of the zeal and activity the Sessions, in that case the matter should be brought of religious sentiments in the country prevailed, as was the into the Presbytery, who should judge of the same; and if case in this country ; but fortunately in both countries they did find their dissent to be grounded on causeless ob there had been a revival of that zeal.—( Hoar, bear.) jections, they ware to proceed to appoint the presentee ; ' This, however, he would say, that for the last therefore they had, by their own act, precluded the notion thirty years he did not believe it possible to conceive of anything like an absolute veto. There had been different any description of patronage which could have been more opinions expressed as to the interpretation of that part of the pure, more perfectly disinterested, or more entirely de- directory, but it appeared to him so clear that he could voted to increase the welfare of the Church, and promote hardly conceive how such differences should have arisen, Coe religion, than had Leen the disposal of it by the pa- and that induced him to read the statement and opinion of trons of Scotland; and further, he would say that in the the late Sir Henry Moncrieff, who was thoroughly con .. intercourse he had with some of the patrons of livings 10-: versant with the laws of the Church of Scotland, an d de that country err the subject of the present state of the votedly attached to its interests. Ho states that "by the Church of Seo :land, and the measure he was about to pro- directory of 1649, for the election of minist ers , if a ma _ pose, he had in variably - met, without a single exception, a jority of the cengregation dissented,, they were to give strong desire to exercise no patronage otherwise than was their reaso ns, of which the I resb yt.. , ry were to judge. If for the w e lfare of the Church itself. Having made these the Presbytery should find their disser founded on cause statements, it was time that he should state to their Lord- less prejudices, they were notwithstan 17,g to proce e d t o t h e ships what the cosadition tof the Church in that country settlement of a m inister." He was on y stating cases en was, which made him say that Legislative interference was which it was s u pp osed some foundation existed for the law indisp pp ensable, and which justifiel trim in aearing before that had been pass ed. The last was the statute of Kin g their Lordships in thaw present instance. He would not William of 1690, when patronage was again abolished, and detail at length th e pr ocee di n gs whiali had led to the pre- the Act for settling ministers provided " the heritory sent state of things, but this he might mention, that a few and elders arc to name and propote the person to th e y ears aijo there was, and indeed always had been, more whole congregation to be approved or disapproved by or less a' degree of hostility in t he count ry to Pa- them, and if they disapprove, that the disapprovants tranage at .all, and an attempt was made in the year give in their reasons to the effect th at the affair may 1834 to put ,an end to it. In that year an Act was passed be cognosced upon by the President of the Boundaries, by the Generad Assembly which was commonly called at whose judgment the calling of the minister was to be th e V e t o Act ; ; that Act provided that ill any presentati on decided." There was no doubt, therefore, that the veto to a benefice if a majority of the lauds of families in corn- which had been recently enacted must be consider e d as an munion with the Church, ex p resse d a dissent to the no- absolute innovation. His great objection to it was mination of an individual, the Presbytery should be pro- that by it the Church abandoned its chief right and duty, hibitcd f ro m i m lucting hint into holy orders. There c ou ld Ti re fi rst thing t h e Assembly claimed front the State b e f ore b e no do u bt th at the General A ss embl y i n passing that any Act recognising the PresbYterian Church of Scotl an d law, thought the v were not going beyond the bounds of was passed, was the right of collation. In 1565 they claimed th e i r own p owe rsthe , but it had been solemnly decided that n r h t o f co llation exclusiv-IY to the Church. Iu Scotch lang.nage and law the mea nin g of the term collation they had. At all ,events, the Act was proposed by a m om . her who was not more•tinguisbed for his love of th e was very diff eren t from that which was familiarly att ac h e d religion o f his fathe - s than ic r his le g al co mpetence, and to it in this country. The term collation in Scotland there co u ld b e no doubt , embly thought w h en they the As. comprised the whole act of objection on the part of the were pa ss i ng th e Act, that they a 'ere doing what th ey had p eo pl e . Th e trial and examination , the ordination and the a power t o d e . Shortly aftc: th Is, the A ssem bl y pro- induction to the benefice, were all compris e d i n t h e term hibittal a Presbytery front ordaining a gentleman t o whom collation. The Church h avin g receive d from the State there wa s d issen t, on the part of the pa, withont th e r i g h t o f co ll a tion of ministers , he contended th a t b y reason assign e d. The gentleman appealed Ito the C ourt o f enacting th i s l aw t h e y had abandoned their rights, and their Session, w hi c h ronou nced that the Veto vas a violation duty, in so far as they ha d g iven u p that which the law of th e l aw o f t h e l an d. The Assembly p \ app ' elcd to this conferred upon them when the Churc h was established House, whi c h d ec id e d that the judgment of ti 'e Court o f an d recogn i se d . The statutes by which th e r i g h t o f co ll a- Sessio n was r i g h t , The judgment of this He 11:e was lion had been recognised and conferred on the Church communicated to the General Assembly. If t h at ' .body were various. To reject a worthy person w i t h out an y had t a k en means to resc i n d the Act of Veto w hi c h “" cause whatever assigned , and from c auses unknown, was al pronounced tube a v i o l a tion of the statute, end had d ec k . `e-11 most as great a breach of duty on the part of the Church their intention to effect the object of preventing the intrusic It as to ordain an improper person, for it was as little consist of. minist ers i n t o p ar i s h es against the will of the congrega- tent with the interests of . religion and t h e we lf are o f t h e Lion by som e o th er means, they would have been 'in less Church to exclude deserving persons in an arbitrary and difficulty than they were at present. However, they re- ir 'evil' able manner as it was to ordain improper persons. 1 3 tained tine law on their journals, but suspended it s op, ra- , ha), been said the veto was only to be consid e red as tion fur one year, and appointed a Committee to cony t the O.& to judge of the qualification of prcsen nicate with her Majety's Government, in order to obta in a tccs. .That was so sophistical an argument that it was scarcely worth a ll u di ng to; and when i t was said teat the Chereh irape.ac d que l litice pree. e ees ecicicli might b e sa id to interice-e the tree right and exercise of patroeage, for instance, i.t• they had done not very long ego, viz., requiring that pre sentees should be poss esse d o f a certain, knowledge of Hebrew, ho would beg to observe that that was a qUalitl cation no doubt inherent in the individual himself, and it was a qualification I\ hid: the Church reserved to itself the power end means of judging of'. He thought her Ma jesty's Government had acted wisely in refusing to bring forward a measure to legalise the Veto Act. Another proposed Act, which he thought her Majesty's Ministers had wisely rejected, was for giving efficiency to the call, by which it was proposed that if a majority of the commu nicants did not agree in assigning the cause for the presentment, it should become null and void, and the Presbytery should, therefore, reject him.—( Hear, hear.) Of the two proposals, he thought that was the worst. It was certainly an absolute novelty. There had been much discussion, respecting the sufficiency I of the call. The call had been treated as an absolute right on the part of the people which was to pre clude the Presbytery, and it was to be considered as an absolute bar in limine to the whole proceeding. That would be giving a joint nomination, and in some respects would be snore objectionable than a veto, because it would become a veto practically of a more odious description, namely, a veto in a part, or in a very small number, of a congregation. But it was more objectionable upon other grounds, because where there were a large body of people who came forward and said they disliked the individual ; that they could never proper under him, and that they were determined to resist him—that might be certainly j objectionable ; but there was a presumption that there was something objectionable in the individual when so many joined in it. But in the case to which he referred, if the majority did not come forward to sign the call, it was inferred, without any grounds whatever being stated, that the individual was disqualfied, therefore the indifference or apathy of the majority was to be presumptive evidence that the presentee was disqualified, although no human being uttered a syllable against him. That appeared to him so monstrous and arbitrary in its nature that nothing possibly could be worse, and he therefore entirely agreed with her Majesty's Government in having rejected that plan. tie was sorry to fatigue their Lordships with these details, but there was still another state of things to which he would refer before he submitted his plan for their conside ration. It appeared that the Learned Lord Advocate had had his attention called to the subject by her Majesty's Government nearly a year ago, and no doubt he had given the matter his best attention. He (the Earl of Aberdeen) was anxious to inform himself of the result of his labours, and a short time since he had seen in a provincial paper a report of a speech upon the subject made by the Hon. Member for the city of Aberdeen. That Gentleman had thought proper to attend what was called a Non-intrusion meeting at Aberdeen, and he there detailed the plan of the Lord Advocate, :which had been communicated to him. However he had ascertained last night that the Learned Lord had advertised his plan in a Scotch newspaper, and therefore the report of the Hon. Gent. was superseded by the Learned Lcrd himself, as lie must be supposed to know his own plan best. lie must say, with due respect to the Learned Lord, that his plan was decidedly the worst of all. —( A laugh.) The Learned Lord adopted the principle of the veto, and required a majority to sign the call. He proposed that where a presentee was regularly presented, if the majority did not come forward to sign the call the presentation should fail, and the patron should be allowed three months to present another. If the same conse quences occurred on the second presentation, three months more were to elapse, and the same rule was to apply to the third; but if the majority did not come forward on the 4th presentation, then he thought it best to have recourse to sonic other provisions—the Presbytery were to be called together, and they were then (after recognising the abso lute right of the people to object)—the Presbytery were then to intrude. So that he came to intrusion, after all the sacrifice so arbitrarily, unjustly, and absurdly of the rights of three presentees (all of whom were unobjectionable for for anything that had been stated) and they came forward and interfered in the case of the fourth. One of the clauses of the Bill provided that, after the stipend had been paid for a year to the Widow's Fund, the residue should, after paying an assistant, be applicable to pious uses. The plan, in his opinion, had literally nothing to recommend it. It did not recognise the right of the people, nor the right of the Church, until three separate cases had been disposed of. The Learned Lord seemed anxious to estab lish something like a popular principle, and although the Church had limited the persons who were to have an opinion to those who were the heads of families, the Learned Lord proposed to extend it to all who were seat holders and members of the congregation. Now, be thought the Learned Lord had in that instance over-shot his mark, and he (the Earl of Aberdeen) was much leis taken if ha did not find that the introduction of such per arms would be repudiated in every part of the country. He was surprised the Learned Lord had not proposed that Bill in the House of Commons, although the Hen. Mem ber for Aberdeen had, in the course of his speech, inti mated that the plan had been dropped in consequence of a notice which had been given by him (the Earl of Aberdeen). The lion. Member must know that that was not the fact. He had given no notice until it had been stated in both Houses that the Government did not intend to bring any plan before Parliament. He looked upon the Lord Advo cate as the servant of the Government, and their organ in Scotch affairs. What he was to understand by the Learned Lord, he really did not know ; perhaps it was intended to cajole the Church by the semblance of a measure which he did not intend to bring forward, and which had already been rejected by her Majesty's Government. He was gra tified to find that the Government was determined to have nothing to do with that plan. He would now state to their Lordships what was the provisions of the plan which lie proposed to submit to them. They were very few, and short, and simple. It appeared that the Learned Lord had submitted his plan to a meeting of those Members of the House of Commons who generally support her Ma jesty's Ministers. He (the Earl of Aberdeen) had not submitted his Bill to any of the Members who oppose the Government. lie had framed it with a sincere desire j that it might ensure its object, and deserve the sup port both of those who supported and those who opposed her Majesty's Government. He be lieved that it would be found consistent with the genius and spirit of Presbyterian Church government. lie believed that it would preserve the independence and jurisdiction of the Church—that it would give due weight to the just claims of the people, while it did not injuriously intrude on the rights of patrons. The preamble recited the rights and duties of collation, and the Bill provided that when a presentee came to a Presbytery duly appointed by the patron, that Presbytery should direct the pre sentee to preach in the church of the parish, according to their instructions. After that the Presbytery should meet, and due notice having been given, they should intimate that if any one or more persons in communion with the Church had any objections of any kind to the individual, or had any reasons to state against his settlement in that parish (because it was of great importance that the indi vidual should be duly qualified for the particular parish in which he was to be located), or had any objections to urge against his gifts and qualities for the cure of the said pa rish, the Presbytery would be ready to receive the same ie writing at the next meeting ; which objections should be afterwards re-considered and disposed of by the Presbytery. If the Presbytery' were Of opinion—regard being had to the whole concerns of the parish—that in respect of any of the objections urged, the individual should not be called in that parish ; the Presb)- tery should specify the grounds on which they founded their opinion in respect of which the presentee was not qualified for that parish. It was further proved that it should be in the power of the presentee, the patron, or the Presbytery, to appeal to the superior Ecelesia eical Court. On the other hand, if, after considering all the objections, they were satisfied in the exercise of their authority and duty, that no good objection existed, or that the objections and reasons assigned were not truly founded, the Presbytery should repel the same, and pro ceed to the further trial and examination of the presentee, and if approved of, appoint him. On a subject like the present, when so much excitement prevailed, it was impossible to suppose that any plan would meet with anything like general approbation ( Hear, hear)— but he hoped for the present one to receive the dispassionate consideration and support of moderate men of all parties. __(Hear, hear.) The Noble Viscount opposite laughed, and he was aware that the greatest stigma which a Churchman could labour under in Scotland was that of being a moderate; but in the English sense of the ' word, he hoped that men of all parties would consent to his plan. It preserved the full jurisdiction of the Church, while it enabled the people to state all the objections they thought proper, which objections would be fully considered by the Presbytery. It might be said by some that he had sacrificed the independence of the Church, but he had al ready expressed his conviction that its rights were, in the Bill before their Lordships, fully preserved, and they might say that he had conceded too much to the Church, and many of their Lordships might be of that opinion. His short answer to that was, that he was quite persuaded there was nothing in the Bill which the Church itself could not by its own legitimate authority exercise and en force. lie was able to state, on the authority of those who were most deeply conversant with the affairs of Scot land, that such was the case. In conclusion he would earnestly recommend to the leaders of the Church of Scotland seriously to consider the position in which they were placed. Most willingly would he for one contribute to close, it' possible, those rents by which the moral strength of the Church was impaired, and lie called upon their leaders most earnestly, respectfully, and afLctionately to consider the perilous position in which they were placed. It was impossible that the present state of things could last. He would conclude by recommending this measure to the attention of the Government and the people of Scotland, and above all to those members of the Church, and they were not a few, who loved peace, and sought it with their whole hearts —( Cheers. ) The Duke of BUCCLEUCII would detain . their sons for approving of the measure of the ., Lordships only a few minutes while he c N sx o p ,o re lc ss i el r l i i . is T re h a a - t the present state of the Church of Scotland was most la mentable and dangerous no one who had paid , any . atten- Lion to the subject could attempt . to deny. From circum stances, he would not detain . their Lordships by re stances, w a i n n d that Church where pastors in many in stances in to the people, and the formerlyl a t re lating, unanimityi e s r s e e n placeds ion hn prevailed, rprepevoiagsi opposition do d n, pastors. Ile was sorry also to say that in of that country agitation had been made use people inayithd t its o i is o r st disastrous results.. .The ultra Non. in otri•usionists had gone out of their own districts into others t ie r tl iC in e t party feuding had nothino. to do with which they had no connection, and by a sort of cru sade had excited the minds of whichthe people, and created e t g h r e ee st4 f eet, and which was likely to do great evil to tanhietdhChurch. The measure which had b een b rought for ward by etc Noble Earl was . one which, whil e i t gave full independence to theChurchrn spiritual matter s , wou ld give to the people that right which h e :th oug h t t h ey ought to have. He did not think the people were the best judges of the qualification of a Minister, they might be misled by improper motives, they might hate a predilec tion for some other person, or although they might have no objection to the minister presented, they might be ac tuated by a strong feeling against the patron, the effect of which wonid be to make the person presented by tint I;at. , :;t rases, 111 the present Met s(r:•, es :,eti 171 left as is ought t be, ie the:hands et lIIC clay,, Du were to judge of tie vaitdity or the objections stated by the congregation. He was not a member of the Church of Scotland himself, yet no one could be more anxious than he was to see that Church established with firmness, :hat nothing should interfere to impair its efficiency, its independence, or its integrity.— ( Hear, hear.) lie thought that the decision ought not to be left in the hands of an irresponsible body. A b o dy o f that nature might be excited by their passions, and might act in such a manner as eventually to force a patron to make an appointment, although he might not think the person so appointed a proper one. In a moment of pas sion a parish might force a person upon themselves, and some future day repent of their precipitancy, when they had no means left to remedy the evil. He could not but express his extreme satisfaction that the Noble Lord had taken up this subject. He had stated clearly the pre sent state of the Church of Scotland, the difficulties and dangers in which it waiplaced, andlthe cause of those diffi culties and daggers, and the means by which they might be remedied; but he could not at the same time avoid ex pressing his extreme surprise and regret that a measure of such great importance, and involving such immense respon sibbity should not have been undertaken by her Majesty's Government. It was the duty of the Government to have brought forward this subject, and not toihave left it to an in dividual who, from local feeling, bad taken the responsibility on himself. Whatever might be the fate of the present Bill, it was one which would always reflect the highest credit, and honour on the Noble Lord.—( Hear, hear.) The Duke of ARGYLE thought the proposed measure very well adapted to remedy the evils from the effects of which the Church of Scotland was at present suffering. The Earl of GALLOWAY having thought it his 'duty on various occasions during the Session, to call upon her Majesty's Government to endeavour to effect the settlement of the present question, was of opinion, that if, on the present occasion, when a measure for its settlement was brought forward by a Noble Lord on his side the House, his motives for urging the subject heretofore on the attention of the Government might be liable to misinterpretation, if not here, at least among his fellow-countrymen in Scot land, if he abstained from expressing that the Government had virtually acknowledged their incompetency to deal with the question, by shrinking from the responsibility of bringing any measure forward. He begged to express his entire concurrence in the measure proposed by the Noble Earl. It appeared to him likely to he satisfactory to those who still opposed the Veto Law of the General Assembly, which their Lordships had declared to be illegal, and those who still maintained that the election of the Minister should be in the people alone. These latter persons founded their arguments on the assumption that such was the law of the Word of God, and such was the ancient usages of the Church. If he could persuade himself that patronage, meaning thereby the presentation of a qualified person to a benefice, was contrary to the Word of God, he, tor one, would not wish to see it continued. But he be lieved there was no precise rule laid down in Scripture on this subject; but that it was left entirely to the discretion of the Church. Now, whatever might have been the practice of the infant Church, he thought it possible that the regulations which were very well adapted to that state might be totally inapplicable to it during the period of its future growth. Whatever might have been the practice of the primitive Church, when it depended upon voluntary contributions of its members for the support of its minis ters, he did not think that it could be held binding upon them under the present circumstances of the connection between Church and State. He was prepared to con tend that the Statute of 1567 afforded no foundation whatever for the Veto Act of the General Assembly of 1834. In troublous times in 1649, he knew that .patronage had been destroyed, and the regular sanction of Parlia ment had been given to its abolition by the Act of 1690: but these acts had not interfered with the spiritual juris diction of the Church. He would never consent to any measure for legalizing the Veto Act, embracing as it did the abolition of patronage ; as he believed that such abolition would nut conduce to the happiness or well-being of either the Church or the people. He hoped their Lord ships would never give their consent to any measure by which the Church should be divested of its spiritual jurisdiction, and the arbitrary right conferred on the people of rejecting presentees. He thought if the heads of the Church bad heretofore exercised their jurisdiction as faithfully as they ought to have done heretofore, these troubles would not have arisen. He would suppose a case. The minister of a parish might be an excellent man, a favourite with the pastor and the parish—he might have a son who bad been a wild young man, but who had returned from his college a reformed character. The patron, and the majority of the parishioners, to please their old minister, might consent to the appoint ment of this young man as his father's assistant and suc cessor, but a minority of the right thinking pa rishioners might think his former life an objection to him, and as likely to impair his usefulness. Formerly such a young man would have been appointed notwith standing this opposition, but he thought if the Church had exercised its jurisdiction properly, such appointments would not have taken place. He believed the present measure was according to the spirit of the ancient Church of Scotland, that it was founded in reason, and a spirit of piety and peace, and that if those persons who were at present employed in Scotland, some in agitating and some in enlightening the public mind on this subject, would unite in recording it, they would be conferring a great public benefit. Viscount ME L BOURN E had listened with the greatest attention to the statements of the Noble Earl. Of course it was not his intention on the present occasion to pretend to go into any observations on the greater part of his re marks, as it would be necessary that on some future occa sion he should fully discuss the question—indeed he should not have thought it necessary to trouble their Lordships if it had not been that his Noble Friend, in bringing forward the motion, and also the Noble Duke and the Noble Earl had expressed their disapprobation of the conduct cf the Government in not ?laving themselves originated some measure on this subject which had agitated the cnt're of Scotland, and had produced in that country an utter disre gard to the authority of the law. It was not his intention on the present occasion to enter into any defence of the conduct of the Government, and he put this off with the greater satisfaction because, after the lapse of a very short time, he should not be surprised as, they advanced a little further in this discussion. if the expediency of the conduct of Government in declin ing to interfere with the question at all should not be made abundantly clear, manifest, and undeniable ; besides be could not attempt that defence without stating some of his objections to the measure of his Noble Friend, into the (14- cussion of which he did not wish to enter at present. He would only say that the occasion was not so grave as it had been represented to be, and that there was not that exi gency for legislative interference which had been supposed to exist. He would on another occasion enter into a dis cussion of the merits of this measure. He was most anxious fur a settlement of this question, and most anxious that the measure of his Noble Friend should have a full, fair, and complete consideration. He should not regret having given up that task to his Noble Friend, notwith standing any proof it might be of incompetency on his (Viscount Melbourne's) part, if it should have the effect of conducing to the effectual settlement of this question. The Earl of H ADDINGTON said that he concurred in almost every word that had fallen from his Noble Friend in introducing his measure. After the tone in which the matter had been discussed, he would not say one word on the conduct pursued by her Majesty's Government, with regard to their not having brought in a measure on the subject on their own responsibility. Neither had he the least desire of entering into a history of bygone factions in the Church of Scotland respecting the question under their Lordships' consideration, because it was his wish to avoid using a single word which could create the smallest irri tation, or prevent the favourable reception of the Bill of his Noble Friend. He would merely express his opinion of the Veto Act by saying, that inasmuch as the clergy of the Church of Scotland had by that Act invested the people with a right of objecting to a presentee, they pro lento abdicated their own functions. The people were, in point of fact, called on by the Act to judge of the qua lifications of their clergy, and that was perhaps the most serious and formidable objection to the veto. It was not, however, the only one. Its harshness to the presentee was palpable, and he was astonished how any one could have acquiesced in a measure so dangerous and un reasonable. It placed the clergy and the people in a false position by investing the latter with an unjust and arbitrary power. With regard to the measure of his Noble Friend he drought it a wise arid salutary one, and as such he joined with his Noble Friend in recommending it to the clergy of the Church of Scotland. The Bill of his Noble Friend would place all parties in their proper places, and the prin ciple on which it proceeded was no other than that which had been laid down by a Baronet of great wisdom, worth, and moderation—he meant Sir Harry Moncrieff, who said it was the duty of the people to object to ministers, and it was the duty of the Church to adjudicate. He would con clude by expressing his conviction that if his Noble Friend succeeded in his measure he would have acquired an envi able situation, and even though he should fail in his endea vour be would deserve the highest praise for having come forward in so courageous and patriotic a manner to settle the differences by which his native country was distracted. The Marquis of BUTE cordially supported the measure introduced by his Noble Friend, and hoped it would be re ceived by the Church of Scotland in the affectionate man ner which it deserved. The Bill was then read a first time and their Lordships adjourned. PARLIEMENTAItY DI lISION. (From the Poles and Proceedings of the House of Commona.) MONDAY, MAY 4. SUPPLY (In Committee.) Motion made, and Question proposed, " That a sum, not exceeding 67,0001., be granted to her Majesty, to defray the charge of Salaries and Expenses of the Commissioners for oar- Tying into execution the Act for the Amendment of the Law relating to the Poor in England and Wales, and the Act for the relief of the Destitute Poor in Ireland, to the 31st day of March 1441 ;"—Afterwards, Motion made, and Question put,— " That a sou, not exceeding 54,25b4 10s. be granted to her Majesty, for the like purpose :"—The Committee divided : MINORITY—AYES, Hindley, C. Pa:m,..r, a James, Sir Walter Pechell, Captain Jones, John Sibthorp, Colonc Kemble, Henry Sinclair, Sir G. Williams, W. Lefroy, Dr. T. Lowther, Colonel TELLERS. Mackenzie, Thomas Hodges, r. Morris, David S o merset, Lord . G. .JORITY—NOES, 57. Russell. Lord John I.ll3l)ll°use'Sir J.C. Robert Rutile:lyd. A. Hol'ond, Howard, P. 14. s ‘ iwcy, Colonel Hume, Joscoh Smith, Vernon Hu Stanley, E J. Knight, ir enry Gaily .Staastie D hi, W. R. Stock, r. cl, S.W. Thornely, Thom as r. 13 LLauabscghteor.ei; hl. Charles l'ancre Martin, John Trowbridge, Sir T. Manic, Hon kcx \ r igors, N A. M d elgun , Lord - Vivian, J. H. Mnskctt, G. A Warburton. H. Nichol!, J Ward, H. G. °Torn, W. S. . Wool, Benjamin Palmerston ' Viscount Woudey, Lord Pondarves, E. W. Yates, John A. Philips, G. It. TELLERS. Ricktord, W. Parker, John Round,, C. O. Tufnell, Henry Blair, J. Brothcrtou, J. Bruges, W. H. L. Burr, Higford Dick, Quintin Egerton, S,r P. G. Ellis, John Hector, C. J, Acland, Sir Thomas k dam, Admiral Sir C. Aglionby, H; A. Baring, P. 'l'. Basset, John Berkeley, C. Bramston. T. W. Briscoe, J. Campbell, Sir John Canning, Sir S. Clay, W. Darby, George Dunce as Ddvid Elliot, Hon J. E. Ewart, W. Ferguson, Sir Ronald Gordon, IL Greene, T. G. Grey, Sir G. Hawes, B. s. EVENING EDITION. FI - 10111 LAST NTT.GETri---7 ~~ '.1.: ''' '' ..(,' 'A__) . *. WHITE:HA:I. A pr. i i. 4, it '' , 44r.) ~I :. '/ .1 ~i ~.•`' •" Esq., ) I-ler Majesty has been pleased to appoint t.i.:olvk-- t \ i epit t r ... •• Esq., Advosiate, to be Sheriff Depute of the Sh:rer...N,, l aiirf - • dom of Peebles, in the room of John Wood, Esq., resigned. CROWN OFFICE, MAT 4. MEURER RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT PARLIAMENT. COUNTY or FERMANAGH.—Sir Arthur I3rinsley Brcoke, Bart., of Colebrook, in the said county of Fermanagh, in the room of Viscount Cole, Clow Earl of Enniskillen. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, MAY 4. Royal Regiment of Artillery—Brevet Lieut.-Colonel A. Alablachlan, to be Lieut.-Colonel, vice Cubitt, deceased; Second Capt. W. Furneaux, to be Contain, vice Maclachlan ; First Lieut. J. Turner, to bq Second Captain, vice Furneaux Second Lieut. 13. Bathurst, to be First Lieutenant, viols Turner, April 11 ; First Lieut. A. A. Shuttleworth, to be Second Captain, vice Cremer, retired on h a lf-p a y ; Second Lieut. H. 13. 0. S av il e, to be ' First Lieutenant, vice Shuttle worth, April 21. MEmciaA.Nnvot.—Th e date of the commissions of the un dermentioned officers of the Royal Reginient of Artillery, has been altered to the 16th March, 1840, viz. Lieut.-Colonel Philip Warren Walker, Captain Robert Clarke, Second Captain George Rogers, First Li eutenant H enry Lyuelock Gardiner. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Staffordshire. The Queen's Own Royal Regiment of Staffordshire Yeo manry Cavalry.—The Right.Honourable Granville George Lord Leveson to bo Captain, vicO Mott, resigned, April 3. Commissions by the Lord-Lientenant of Someßsetshire. West Somerset Regiment of Yeomanry Cavalry. —A. P. Brown, Esq. to be Captain ; J. Randolph, Gent to 1 3 e Lieu tenant; F. N. Bower, Gcut. to be Cornet, April Z). An Account of the Average Aggregate Amouot of Notes in Circulation in England and Walea, by Private Banks and by Joint Stock Banks, distinguishing each, between the 28th December 1839, and the 28th March 1840.—From Returns directed by 3 and 4 .W. 4, c. 83. Private Banks Joint Stock Bank .£6,893,012 3,940,232 £10,833,244 HENRY L. WICKHAM. Stamps and Taxes, Mny 5, 1840. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. JOSEPH BROOK, corn dealer, Victoria-road, Pimlico. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED. JOSEPH FRENCH, jun., ribbon-manufacturer, Cotentry. JOHN HOWARD HETHERINGTON, brewer, White haven. BANKRUPTS. THOMAS MILLER, artists' coloarman, Long-acre, to surrender May 12, at two, and June 16, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Cannan, Finsbury square, official isisigmee ; Ford, Bloomsbury-square. JOSEPH HOSKINS, chranometer-maker, Hercules-court, Broad-street, City, May 14, at one, and June 16, at twelye, the Court of Bankruptcy. Belcher, official ass,goee ; Ashley, Shoredi tch. • SAMUEL PRATT, stone-mason, Nottingham, May IT, and June 16, at twelve, at the Geor g e th e F ourt h Hotel, Not tingham. Brewster, Nottingham ; Taylor and Coilisson, Bedford-row, London. THOMAS TEMPLETON and ARCHIBALD TEM PLETON, silk-manufacturers, Congletcn, Cheshire, slay 21, at twelve, and June 16, at two, at the Mazelestield Arms Ina, Maecieifield. Kay, Barlow, and Aston, Manchester. RICHARD PARKER, wharfinger, Anderton, Cheshire, May 21, at twelve, and June 16, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Alsager, official as.ignee, Birehin-lane, COrn hill ; Stevens, Wilkinson, and Satchell, Queen-street, Cheap side, London. AUGUSTUS WESTLEY, publican, Friars-street, Doc tors'-commons, May 18, at one, and June 16, av eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee, Basin;- hall-street; Goddard, King-street, Cheapside. JOHN CLARKE, green-grocer, Brook-street, Holborn, May 12, at one, and June 16, at twelve, :It the Court of iLnk-. ruptcy. Green, official assignee, Aluermanbury ; Kennett and Gregcry, Chatham-place, Blacktriars. CHARLES BRERETON, JOSEPH VERNON, and DAVID PAUL, engine -manufacturers, Kingston-upon-Hull, May 27, and June 16, at eleven, at the Goorge Inn, Kingston upon•Hull. Lightfoot a n d Earushaw, Hull; Walinsley, Keightley, and Parkin, Chancery-lane, London. The following places have been duly registered for solomniz ng marriages therein, pursuant to tho Act of the 6th and 7th William IV., chap. 85 : All Saints, Sedgley, Staffordshire. Cheeseburne Grange Chapel, Chefceburne Grange, Nor. thumberland. Ebenezer Chapel, Kidderminster. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basingball- street. S. Hind, grocer, Sekford-street, Clerkenwell, May 26, at eleven--T. 111*Donnell, boot maker, Pall-mall, Illy '26, at half-past one—T. Driver and J. Moore, shipowners, City of. London, May 22, at one—A. Emerson, lead merchant, Law rence I'ountney-lane, City, May 2S, at half-past eleven—R. Witherby, merchant, Nicholas-lane, City, Mal- 28, at two—lL Scholefield, warehouseman, 'Watling-street, City, May 27, at eleven—W. Harrison, printer, Portsmouth, May 26, at eleven —W. Rose, hotel keeper, liatt's Hotel, Dover-street, Picca dilly, May 26, at twelve—J. C. Dawe, printseller, Regent street, Pall-mall, May 27, at twelve—J. Cooper, painter, Ha nover-street, Hanover-square, May 27. at one. In the Country. H. Aldrich, corn merchant, Ipswich. May 29, at one, at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, Ipswich—W. Swain, builder, Lea. miogton Priors, Warwickshire, May 28, at twelve, at the Lansdowne Hotel, Leamington Priors—J. Courtney, druggist, Brecon, May 28, at twelve, at the Castle Hotel, 'Brecon—J. Loveridge, cabinet maker, Bridport, May 28, at one, at the Bull Hotel, 13ridport—J. Whiteley, machine maker, Halifaz, Yorkshire, May 28, at one, at the Shakespeare Tavern, Halifax —J. Gamble and T. Kidd, wood sawyers, Sutton-in-Holder nest, Yorkshire, May 29, at one, at the George Inn. Kingston upon-Hull—J. Lawless, commission agent, Mancheeter, May 30, at twelve, at the Commissioners.'-rooms, 3Janchester—W. Skinner, miller, Heatlifield, Susses, May 28, at one, at the White Hart Inn, Lewes, Sussex --1. Harris, innkeeper, Rhyl, Flintshire, May 26, at eleven, tht the White Horse Inn. Holy well, Flintshire—J. Jackson, drover, Westbury-upon-Severn, Gloucestershire, June 1, at twelve, at the Bear Inn, Newnhant —C. Honey, corn dealer, Littlemore, Oxfordshire, hay 29, at' eleven, at Mr. T. Lucas's, Town-hall, Oxford—W. and E. Wheeler, horse dealers, Oxford, July 10, at eleven, at Mr. Lucas's, Town-hall, Oxford-_T. Fiageon, E. Getley, and H. Lomas, merchants, Birmingham, Jiane 2, at one, at the New Royal Hotel, Birmingham—T. Danibell, copper smelter, Trelis sick, Cornwall, Dec. 18, at twelve, at Pearce's Hotel, nzro,„ Cornwall—S. Smith, cotton spinner-, Stay-ley, Cheshire, May 28, at twelve, at Mr. J. Taylor's, Manchester—W. Hodgett.t. bookseller, 13irmingliam, May 26, eleven, at the New Roy:: Hotel, Birmingham. CERTIFICATES.—May 26. W. J. Milne and R. Morri.mn, piano-forte manufacturer', Percy-street, Rathbone-place--S. Fox, corn dealer, Man.:tiles ter—A. Krauss, manufacturer, Salford, Lancashire-4. Bon nor, money scrivener, Gleucr.ste:—H. Blackburn, grocer, Ha lifax, Yorkshire—T. B. Lawfo..d, wine merchant, Fenchurch street, City—J. Collins, buildr.r, Gillingham, Dorsetsbire. PARTNERSII 7 :::'S DISSOLVED. F. de Biller, J. F. A. de Bidder, and J. Spooner, George town, Demerara—J. Smith and E. L. Baldwin, brewers, Bath —G. Richards and G. It. 2.lkington, toy manufacturers, B ar t_ lett's-building, Holborn--I. Martindale and .1. Hutton, silk mercers, Liverpotl—T. Sharpies and .1. Travis, woollen printers, Waterfoot, Las cashire.—A. Colvin, W. Ainstie, Cowie, D. Anislir., •Ind H. Cowie, merchants, Calcutta (as far as regards A. Colvin)—G. and H. Oakley, car penters, Wandsworth -road—G. Christian and J. Howard, ma thematical instrument makers, Liverpool—J. and J. Travers. wholesale grocers, London— W. S. Matthews and E. Bostnck, shoe manufacturers, Stone, Staffordshire—C. Blomfield and G. Grewcock, surgeons, Falkingham, Lincolnshire—W. Ridgway and R. M. Robes', china manufacturers, Hanley. Staffordshire —H. Scyde and E. Jones, milliners, Wolverhampton—J. and R. Gray, organ builders, New-road, St. Pancras—G. Cutler and G. Wadsworth, ironfounders, Bradford. Yorkshite—L. Samuels and W. Thornton. lace makers, Ison-green, Notting ham—W. Dutton and H. E. B. Giles, attorneys.at-law, Han ley, Staffordshire—C. Dugdale and J. Blanchard, millers, Lit verpool—J. and J. Stringer, s ki nners , Sp ou t- green , Cheshire —T. Matterson and W. Preston. jun., woollen drapers, South Shields—J. Aspden, J. Ramsbottom, and J. Itamabottom, cotton spinners, Minorca Mill, Spotland, Lancashire (as far as regards J. Asplen)—F. Pritchard and T. S. Burman, sur geons, Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire—H. Strut ton and H. W. Hellyor, coal dealers, Railway-arches, Bermondsey street. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. THOMAS M'LAY, cattle dealer, Glasgow, May 13 and June 3, at two, at J. I3egg and Co.'s,, Glasgow.. JOHN KENNEDY, manufacture;, Dundee, May 11 and June 1, at twelve, at Denham's Inn, Murrygate, Dundee. ARCHIBALD PATERSON, wine merchant, Glasgow, May 9 and 30, at twelve, at the office of J. Monteith, writer, Glasgow. JOHN WATSON, fiesher, Dundee, May II and June 1, at twe ye, at Denham'a Hotel, Dundee. From Henry Cowper, Esq., of Tewen-waters, Herts, to Messrs. S. and B. S o l omons, 39, AlbemarleL ee strt. Piccadilly :—Gentlemen,—Having been deaf for many years, I was induced from recommendation to try your Invisible V gjcte Conductors, end • I have great pleasure to tell you that they enable me to hz.ar persons in company and at a place of worship most distinctly . ; an d i n consemence of the gr ea t e d vantaie wl.ich I have d er i ve d, r have ' recommended many persons te you, and I am happy to state that their report is similar te mine most favourable. The Spectacles and Hand-glass which you have sent me are very excellent, and suit my sight precisely, and surpass anything of the kind I hay. ever tried; the transparency of which is so brilliant that, al though I have passed my eighty-sixth rear, the 224 of May last, yet they enable me to read, Sic., by candle-light with the greatest ease and comfort to myself. Gentlemen, II return you my best thanks, and remain your most obedient servant, HF.NRY Coween.-22d of June, 1839." .‘ Mr. H. Cowper, of T ewen W aters, i n t h e county of H erta , f ee l s hi m . self under the necessity, in order to avoid the extreme incon venience of reeeiving day after day application from all quar ters to .know whether a letter of his to Me: srs. S. and B. Solo mons is authentic or riot, assures them it is so, and that for the future he must decline answering any such application. H e will enter his 87th year on the 22d of May next, and being full cf the infirmities attendant on that period of life, he hum bly requests that he may be permitted to pass it as undisturbed as may be. —Standard. 6th April, 1840. . " 'VALUABLE MEDICINE. —A pamphlet has p just appeared. (sold by Te gi „ of Chea sick, at a trifling charfie,) entitled " Horsman 's Account of a Remedy of un r i ra l of in •AA the relief and cure of the more painful, aggrawlid, and intractable disorders of man"—v.hich promises to be very useful to sufferers. This remedy has succeeded in bad cases which had resisted the prescriptions and efforts of many phy sicians Medical testimony is to this effect :—" It is an artitie which controls diseased actions of the worst kind—less,; ns an d removes tumours and swellings of some nilligriancy, which no thing else that I am acquainted with has any power over— and it is this potent agency, whereby it is capable of arrest ing the ravages, and neutralizing the virus, of sclane of the most formidable maladies of man, that recommend s it strongly to the notice of th e professabn, and all severe sufferers. Our Alateria Medici contains very many medicines of value but the experienced physician will confess, that we possess a very small number, indeed, of this class of remedies. k gentleman had suffered from a troublesome eruption, Chau matic pains, and sores, for a long time ; he had taken the best alteratives under thedirection of the best surgeons, and cams is London with a large quart bottle (the last of twelve) of a ve getable decoction in his carriage, without avail.---This pas der perfectly cured him in six weeks." DEATH OF A MILITARY SURGEON FRoAt A POST Moitntm EXAMINATION.—The mortality . in , the Royal Artillery and Engineers, at Woolwich, is beyo n d few dent for a long series of years, and in conseque nce t he o e S ital. As harassed from the constant duty of attending officers of the Ordnance Medical Departmentthtahv .been much P had este •day fell a victim to been forty-one years in active service, 3 /. t. _ sistant-gurgeon and Apothecary . William Harris, , N 0 whilst engagta his proles total wound r e ceived a du w tZ' rbeyema scalpel whilst .0 , ,/ d for ", rc ;on of ;,e§ bt, I "~~