The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-04-05 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. Emperial i,3arlianunt. .11013 - SE OF LORDS. MONDAY, AreiL 1. - The Marquess of WESTMINSTER presented a petition from the parish of St. Bride, Fleet-street, against the house and 'window tax; and another petition from the same parish, for the removal of the abuses in the church establishment in Wales. 'Lord SUFFlELD . presented petitions from Oldham and several other places, praying for the immediate abolition of slavery. After a few words from Lord ELLENBOROUGH and Earl GREY, they were laid upon the table. The Earl of ltosEsEity presented a petition from. Glasgow, praying for some alteration in the mode of bestowing church patronage in Scotland. Lord WHARNcLIFFe, in presenting a petition for the better .observance of the Sabbnili, said that he could not give his assert qi the measure which had been introduced upon this sub ject in -another Pla(:e, and which it was quite impossible ever to make palatable to the people of this country. (Immense cries of " Hear.") The Bishop of LONDON presented petitions from the parishes of St. Bride, and of St. John, Hampstead, for the better uhs,ervance of the Sabbath. In presenting these petitions he said, that he knew nothing of the measure which had been introduced elsewhere, except what he had seen in the news papers. Lord ELLENBOROUGH recommended the Bishop of London, or some other right rev. prelate, to introduce a rational measure upon this subject; for the measure which had been introduced iota the other house would, he was certain, disappoint all the -Objects which.the rev. bench had at heart at present. The only means of accomplishing their object was by introducing im mediately a more rational measure. (Hear, hear.) Earl GREY presented a petition from Stayley-bridge, praying that the marriages of Dissenters may be celebrated according to their own principles of faith, and not according to the forms of a church of which they were not members. The Marquess of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from Selkirk in favour of the Factories Bill. DISTURBANCES (IRELAND) BILL. Earl GREY moved the order of the day for taking into con sideration the amendments of the Commons to this bill. A few verbal amendments were agreed to without discussion. - *On the amendment which takes political offences out of the jurisdictiOn of the military tribunals being read, R Lord ELLENBOoUGH said that the original enactment was proposed and agreed to by their lordships on the ground that, in consequence of the system of intimidation practised upon ,jurors in Ireland, justice could not be obtained if the political (silences to which the clause referred were tried according to the course of the common law. If the noble earl was right in thinking, when he brought in the bill, that these offences ought to go before a court-martial, because justice could not be obtained in the course of the common law, he must be wrong now in giving his assent to the amendment which had come up from the Commons, unless he was prepared to say that a material improvement had taken place in the moral condition of Ireland. If the noble earl stated that the condition of Ire rand was greatly improved, and that justice might now be 4.spected from common juries, he (Lord Ellenborough) wows' most joyfully accede to the amendment; but unless such a statement was made, lie should feel himself obliged, with great reluctance undoubtedly, to express his dissent to the amend- Vint which the Commons had irrationally come to. (Hear.) The Earl of ELDON thought it a perfectly true saving that " necessity justifies what necessity compels." /lad the minis ters applied that saying properly, if, after they had come down to that house and proposed that the trial by jury should be sus pended, and certain offenders subjected to courts-martial, it turned out there was no necessity for such measures? (Hear.) The enemies of the reform act had been represented throughout the country as the enemies of the liberties and the dearest rights sit Englishmen, but he could inform the noble earl opposite that the sentiments of the people had experienced some changes on this point. The people said, never mind what the House of Lords did with respect to this bill, for it was sure of being ma terially altered in the House of Commons. That was certainly a new way of putting an end to the House of Lords. But, he asked, was the original enactment, to which the Commons had made an amendment, required by necessity? Before, there fore, he could give his issent to the amendments of the Com mons, he must be assuted that a great improvement had taken place in Ireland : for hi did not wish to stand before the coun try as a man who, upon lightgrottmbs, would deprive the people of their constitutional privirigi*s Earl GREY conceived that tae Ihll, altered as it had been since it left their lordships' house, would still be effectual for the pa cification of Ireland. He should indeed have been as well pleased had some alterations which had taken place in the mea cure been withheld, but as it had cnitte back to them altered and . amended, their duty as legislatc4i.-as to consider whether At was still effectual. It could scar(ali he considered a reproach to show a disposition to examine themeasure with eveiy care, and if, upon consideration, the alterations were found to be use ful and beneficial, to adopt them. He thought that, under such circumstances, they would only be showing a due degree of de prence to the opinion of that house of parliament, and be at the same time discharging their duty to the public, by accept ing and approving the amendments. That was the true and only question for them to consider. Now, with respect to the clause under discussion, it r( aily appeared to him to contain the same provision in effect as when it left their lordships' house, the only difference being the exception with respect to proclaimed districts. This exception did not, in his opinion, diminish the efficiency of the enactment. It had been said that the preamble was not in accordance with the provision, but it should be borne in mind that the whole bill proceeded on the supposition, that the laws at present in operation in Ireland were not sufficient for the repression of disorder, and therefore new laws were called for; and so fully was he convinced of the efficiency of the new enactments, that, with the . bill in his hand, he would not hesitate to answer for the pacification of Ireland. The clause as amended was then put and agreed to. Earl Guts , then moved the clause which exempts from sum mary conviction all persons who refuse to disperse from a pub lic meeting within a quarter of an hour alter notice. - Lord ELLENBOROUGH - thought that no sufficient reason had been shown for the alteration in this clause. From all he had heard of the state of Ireland during former periods, when the insurrection Act was in operation, he was confident that no thing had been found so efficient for the pacification of the coun try as the process of summary convictioq. After some observations from Earl GREY, the clause was agreed to. The proviso which renders it not lawful for the Lord-Lieu •tenant to apply the act to proclaiming any county or district merely because tithes shall not have been paid in such county or district came next under discussion. . The Duke of WELLINGTON strongly objected to the intro duction of this proviso, as its direct tendency was to deny jus tice to the clergy. Why did not the framers of the bill begin their preamble with "Whereas it is expedient that no payment of tithe shall take place in Ireland? " It would have been bet .ter to have done so at once, than thus to wink and connive at the injustice to which the Irish clergy were to be subjected by the bill. The noble duke then referred to another clause of the bill (the 21st), which though pretended to be founded on the 27th of George 111., was vet in direct violation of the spirit of that act, and instead of doing justice to the clergy, went to de prive them of their rights. He objected to the first amendment because it gave a sanction for the spoliation of the church of Ireland; and to the second, because it took away from the . Lord-Lieutenant the pOwer of sending any offence which con nected itself in any shape with tithe to be tried by courts martial. Their lordships were in the habit of hearing a great deal said about the distress of the people of Ireland. Now, if there were distress in that country, it was attributable to the insecurity of property there, which prevented the rich man from .engaging ift-those enterprises which might produce an in crease of capital to himself, but mere certain to produce an in crease of employment to the poor labourer. The Loan CHANCELLOR said if he could bring himself-to en tertain the apprehensions of the noble duke, and ser imagine that the changes made by the other house in this bill prevented its operation, and rendered it less capable than it was in its original condition to afford protection to the loyal subject, which was one of its main objects, be should agree with the noble lord, not only in lamenting the changes which had been made in it, but also in withholding his assent from them. The noble lord here recited the different penal enactments of the bill, and from • that recital inferred, that since its entrance into the House of Commons it had increased in vigour, in efficacy, and in neces sary severity. (Hear.) The Earl of HalthowaY was afraid that the mention of " tithes" in this clause would induce the belief that that spe cies of property was to be deprived of the protection afforaed to all other kinds of property, and he would, therefore, ,for the purpose of rendering the clause free from this exclusive and partial character, move that to the provision that no district be soociaimed merely for the " nonpayment of tithe," the words " rent or mace" be added. He belived that the addition of • 4hesewords would take the sting out of the clause, and that it would also have the effect of saving time, by rendering a con fbrence with the Commons unnecessary. Lord MELBOURNE put it to the common sense of the noble turd, whether it was likely that delay would be avoided by such a device as that he proposed? (Hear.) The amendment was calculated to produce the same impression among the . people with respect to rent and taxes as the noble lord opposite had predicted would be created with respect to tithes. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that the proposed amend 'pent, so far from being calculated to save time, would create more delay than a conference. He was confident that the in troduction of the proposed words would be most fruitful of de bate and opposition elsewhere. (Hear.) After a a few words from Lord Ellenborough s the house divided, and the numbers appeared : Content Not content B5, Majority against Lord Harrowby'-s amendment.- 40 The rest of the amendments of the Commons were then read and agreed to, and the house adjourned at half-past 11 o'clock. MONDAY. Petitions, praying for the better observance of the Sabbath, were presented by the Bishops of Hereford, Durham, Bangor, and Rochester, and the Earl of Roden, who also presented a petition from Connor, in Ireland, praying for au a►teration. of the system of education in Ireland, and another from several parishes in Ireland, praying for a convocation of the clergy to consider of the proposed church reform in that country. The Earl of Wicto.ow would take that opportunity to state that the bill enabling the clergy of Ireland to enforce the collec tion of their tithes, which had been . passed for a year, was now expired. Many of the clergy were in a state of the utmost des titution. He therefore hoped that it was the intention of go vernment to bring forward some immediate measures for their relief. _ _ Viscount MELBOURNE replied in a tone of voice which ren dered him almost inaudible in the gallery. We understood him to say that the whole question connected with this subject would shortly be brought under the consideration of Parliamtnt, and to assure the noble lord that the topics to which he had advert ed had not escaped, but seriously engaged, the attention of his Majesty's government. The Earl of RODEN was sorry that ministers were so dealto the situation of the clergy of Ireland as not to have introduced some measures for their relief already. He could assure their lordships that, to his knowledge, many of them were now living upon charity. Lord AUCKLAND presented a number of petitions from differ ent places, praying tor the immediate abolition of negro slayery. Lord KING presented a similar petition from Wallinghird, Berkshire ; a petition from -, praying that some le e ,&istatiy_e measures be enacted making provision for the poor of Ireland, and that the landholders of Ireland may be compelled to con tribute thereto ; also a petition front Yeovil, Somersetshire,Thr the abolition of the taxes on knowledge; also petitions from Kil lala, and other places in Ireland, praying for the abolition of tithes. _ _,„. Lord KING having presented these petitions, proceeded''to express the great regret which he felt, that when the petition respecting the abuses in the Welsh church was presented last night, a rev. prelate (the BishOp of St. Asaph) had not been pre- I Sent; for on a former evening he had used expressions whicth had done great wrong and injury to the author of a book which he had quoted, and which he had denounced as containing a number of gross falsehoods. After the rev. prelate had made that statement to their lordships, there appeared a contradietiOn of it in the newspapers. It was not, under such circumstancies; too much to expect that the rev. prelate would have come down to their lordships and owned that he made an unfounded state ment, especially as he made his own erroneous assertion the basis of the strong comment E.c uno disco 07MleS. When a per son of the rev, prelate's elevated situation came forward to de stroy the reputation of an author, he should confine himself strictly to repeating the exact words which that author used. The Bishop of ST. ASAPH regretted extremely that he had been prevented by indisposition from attending in his place yes terday evening; and added, that if the noble marquess had had the courtesy to inform him that he was going to present a peti tion connected with so humble an individual as himself, he would, notwithstanding his indisposition, have made a point of attending in his place in that house. He thanked the noble baron for having given him an opportunity upon this occasion of answering, not only what he (LorctKing) . had just saicl p lbut also the assertion that he had on a former night made an . uft founded statement. He had not quoted at all from the pam phlet to which the noble baron had referred—he had read from a paper (which he believed to be good authority, as it came from a highly respectable clergyman in his diocese) a statement to this effect—that there had appeared in a certain patriphlet, in one passage, that Christ Church, Oxford, received f. 4,700 a year, and in another that it received £.1,500 a-year for tithes from various parishes in Wales. Now, it appeared that the fact was, that the whole value of the tithes of the parishes .in question was only £2,00Q a-year, and that of this sum only £5OO a-year was paid to Christ Church, Oxford. He was sorry to hear the noble marquess on a former occasion cast a sneer upon a most respectable Clergyman in his diocess, the licv. Cleaver. A. better.man did not exist, and he only wished the noble marquess to imitate the conduct and follow the example of that clergyman, who gave away among the poor three parts of the income which he derived from his livinv. Regarding this gentleman and his brother, Mr Johnes Inufbeen guilty of many . misrepresentations. He had also given a list of all the places limn which he (the Bishop of St. Asaph) derived his income. The description was so minute that a stranger must suppose it true, for lie summed up all the items by saying, "'total amount of the revenues of the bishop, £9,20 a-year." So minute were the items, that any person reading them must suppose that Mr. Johues had had access to the books of-his receiver. He could only say, that he wished very much that his income was such as Mr. Johnes had described it to be. Their lordships would see that Mr. Johnes statement was a gross misrepresentation, when they had before them the report of the ecclesiastical commissioners. Mr. Johnes' had pub lished another letter in the papers of that morning, in winch he said " I will not believe that the right rev. prelate would charge me with wilful la/seliod on light grounds." He asked their lordships whether they were to be called to account in consequence of paragraphs in newspapers ? Ile could not re tract what he had on a former evening said; on the contrary, he felt it to be his duty to persist in asserting that the book written by Mr. Johnes contained very gross misrepresentations, and statements that were untrue. The 'Marquess of WESTNIII4STER said that the statements of which the right rev. prelate complained were corrected by Mr. Johnes in toe second coition, and they ought not therefore to be designated falschood4. he was surprised to hear the right rev. prelate denounce the letter written by Mr. Johnes to a morning paper as a breach of their lordships' privileges. The letter was written by Mr. Johnes for the purpose of vindicating himself upon a point with respect to winch he had been mis represented; and it was not by ten thousand degrees so great a breach of privilege as was every day committed by the per sons who attendea in the gallery and reported the proceedings of that house: After a few words from the Bishop of St. AsAril, in explana tion, the conversation on this subject ended. DISTURBANCES (IRELAND) BILL. The Loan CHANCELLOR acquainted the house that his Ma jesty had been pleased to issue a commission empowerinc , cer tain lords to give the Royal assent to the several acts therein named; and he moved that their lordships should 'ajourn pro tempore, in order to allow the commission to be executed. The motion. having been carried, the LORD CHACLLLOR, the Duke of IticiisiciND, and the Marquess of LANSDOWN , took their seats before the throne as Lords Commissioners, when the Royal assent was given in the usual form to the Disturbances (Ireland) Bill, and two private bills. The hi;use i aviug restimed— Lord LYNDlirlisT requested the noble and learned lord (Wynford) to pospoue his bill relative to common law courts, which was fixed for consideration that night. The provisions of the bill were very important, and having just returned from the country, he had not bad time properly to examine them. After a few words from Lord WYNFoRD and Lord PLUN KETT, the bill was postponed until after the recess. JCR[LS (IRELAND) BILL. Lord PLUNKETT moved the second reading of this bill. He said that he had on a former occasion explained the .general outline of the measure, and he was not aware that any very great objections were entained with respect to it in any quarter. Lord CARBERY said that he was strongly opposed to the bill; and lie thought that the noble and learned lord was bound to point out the defects of the present system before he proposed such au entire change in the mode Of administering justice in Ireland. The £lO freeholders, and the £l5 leaseholders, who by this bill were to form the class of ersons from whom the juries were to be selected, would be found quite incapable of discharging the duties imposed on them. Many of them did not understand a word of the English language; and, knowing well their general character, he should be sorry to trust the lives and property of the King's subjects to their judgments. The Earl of V ICKLow thought that the present jury system ought to be continued, because in practice it had proved most efficient. Their lordships were called upon to agree to the proposed alteration because it was desirable to assimilate the laws of England and Ireland. Now he thought it would be much better for the noble lords opposite to exercise their in genuity and talents in endeavouring to assimilate the condition, the habits, and pursuits of the people of the two countries. He would undertake to say, that so far from the present system not working well s - there existed no reason for changing it. He was opposed to the provision which authorized sheriffs to select juries from £lO freeholders, because he considered that class of persons not capable of properly discharging the duties of jurors. He did not regard a meney qualification as a proper test of the ability of a juror, and though refraining to oppose the second reading of the bill, he would, nevertheless,_ when the bill reached a committee, move an amendment for the parliosg of making it apparent that a property qualification ought not to be the only qualification for a juror. Lord WYNFORD said that he so entirely agreed in the obser vations of the noble lord who had just sat down, that he had come to the conclusion of opposing the second reading of the bilL If there was any pretence for the present measure he had. ' certainly done wrong in voting for that 'bill which had now be come the law of the land,—he meant the Irish Disturbances Bill. He had also voted for a bill for changing the venue in Ireland, on the ground that juries in Ireland could not be trust ed. This was au additional reason with him for not voting for the bill before the house, particularly at the present time.— That portion of the bill which went to improve the mode of 4triking special juries, was entitled to his hearty approbation. Sir 11. Peel's Special Jury Bill was very objectionable, as much so, indeed, as his common jury measure was above all praise. tie remembered the time when a London special jury was able to teach even the judges commercial law: now, owing to Sir R. Peel's act, they were too often as ignorant of it as the very crier. Feeling these objections to the principle of the learned lord's bill, he would move as an amendment, that it be read a second time that day six months. The Marquess of CLAN RICARDE was surprised at the objections urged by the learned lord to the principle of the bill, that it was neither more nor less than a step towards assimilating the legal institutions of England and Ireland. If the system has workd Well in England, why not extend its advantages to Ireland ? In Ireland the people as a mass had no confidence in the law; they, in fact, knew its administrauts but as so many legalized tyrants. The law to them was but a machinery of oppression, instead of protection ; hence their approving sympathies were readily extended to its violators or victims : who, instead of, as in this happier country, being regarded - With condemnation and abhorrence, were actually sacred. in the eyes of their fellow vil lagers. It was absurd to attribute the deplorable working of this mischievous delusion to the " sayings and doings" of Mr. O'Con nell and his men. All that the agitators did was to take artful advantage of the unsettled state of the public mind in Ireland, and stimulate it for their own sordid purpose. It was, therefore, because he conceived the present bill. calculated to induce con fidence in the jury tribunals in Ireland, and thence respect for the laws, that he would give it his best support. To say that it was democratic in principle was no objection, unless it was clearly shown that it would call into existence, as jurors, per sons whom the Irish would less confide in than the pre3ent class of jurors, and that could not be shown, for the contrary was the fact. Lord ELLENBOROUGH agreed with his learned friend (Lord Wynford) that the bill was not only uncalled for and ill-timed, but quite inconsistent with the bill which they had passed for doing away altogether with trial by jury in Ireland. In a moral country there could be no greater blessing than the system of trial by jury ; in an immoral, no greater curse. The Earl of RODEN thought the measure a most dangerous one, and especially so at the present moment. If there were no other reasons for its condemnation than this, it was sufficient, —namely, that the 12 judges were unanimously opposed to the jurors'-book, which was the soul of the measure. Lord PLUNKETT thought that through the whole debate too much stress had been laid on the name of Mr. O'Connell. Ile saw no reason for this. He (Lord Plunkett) had not intro duced the measure on account of Mr. O'Connell's concurrence, nor would he have refrained from doing so on account of any opposition that .gentleman might have displayed towards it. But the main objection to the bill was, it seemed, that there was something in it which might lead to the inference that property was to be the sine qua non qualification for common jurors. This would certainly, if true, be a strong objection. But he believed the answer to such au inference would be found in the fact that the lists made out in the first instance by the barony collectors were to be returned to the justices of the peace for revision, with power to add or to strike off any names they choose. The list was then to be placed in the hands of the sheriff, who was not to be hound down by its contents, but might use his discretion with regard to them. With respect to the re gulations respecting special juries, he could assure the noble and learned lord, who entertained such homage and veneration for the opinions of the judges, that that particular part of the bill was drawn up in exact conformity with their suggestions. He would only further state his conviction that the measure he had proposed would, if carried into execution, ensure to the people of Ireland the impartial administration of justice. Lord WyNFORD said a few words in explanation. The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted to-morrow. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition for the better observance of the Sabbath, but said, at the same time, that the petition had no reference whatever to a bill at present before the other house of Parliament, (Hear, hear.) The hodse adjourned at a quarter past 9 o'clock. WEDNESDAY. On the Earl of SHAFTESI3URT taking his seat on the Wool sack at live o'clock, Mr. SPRING Rica, and other members of the House of Com mons,brought up the London and Birmingham Railway Bill, the Marine Mutiny Bill, and a Bill for draining certain lands in Kent and Sussex; and also informed the house that they had agreed to Sciane'sMuseum Bill sent down to them. The Bills were read a first time. The Earl of ROSEBERY presented a petition from Edinburgh, complaining of the monopoly of the Apothecaries' Company in London. Lord WYNFORD said that upon the whole, in his opinion, the Apothecaries' Act had been beneficial to the country. The Duke of ARGYLL presented petititions from Mull, pray ing for the better observance of•the Sabbath Lord SUFFIELD presented petitions, praying for the imme diate abolition of slavery, from Ringwood, .Hants, Saltash, Kirkwall, Picturn, and other places. COURT OF CHANCERY. The LORD. CHANCELLOR presented to their lordships a bill for amending the proceedings in the Court of Chancery. The house went into committee on the Irish Jury Bill, when some verbal amendments were suggested by Lords Wicklow and Ellenborough, and agreed to. Aftera short conversation across the table between Lords Plunkett and Ellenborough, it was ordered that the report be received to-marrow, and that the third reading should nut take place till after it was printed.—Adjourned. TEIOUSII OF COMMONS. MONDAY, APRIL 1. The Speaker took the chair, this day, at a quarter-past 12 o'clock. • Lord CAVENDISH brought up the report of the select coin mittee on the petition against the return for the borough of Ripon, which stated that 'l'. C. Staveley and J. S. Crompton, Esqrs., (the sitting members,) were duly elected; and that neither the petition, nor the opposition thereto, was frivolous or vexatious - . Captain . Wmtvss brought up the report of the Portarlington election committee, stating that Thomas Gladstone, Esq., (the sitting member,) had been duly elected; and that neither the petition, nor opposition'ithereto, was frivolous or vexatious. Mr. Sheriff tIUMPHREY presented a petition from certain inhabitants of the Borough of Southwark, against the London and Greenwich Railway Bill; and petitionsio the same effect from the overseers of the parish of St. °lave; and from the guardians of Queen Elizabeth's grammar school, Southwark. —Laid on the table. • SOANE'S MUSEUM PETITION. Mr. CoasErr presented a petition from Mr. George Soane, the only surviving son of Sir John &mile, against the bilistand iug for a third reading this day, and praying to be heard in. per son, and ley his counsel and witnesses, or for such other relief as to the house should 4eRIZI meet. As he (Mr. Cobbett) had ne ver in his life either heard of Sir John Soane or his son until the latter brought him the petition, he was not influenced by any feeling of partiality, but he should, when the hon. mem ber for Middlesex moved the third reading of the bill, propose an amendment. He was informed that the wife of Sir John Soane had brought him £30,000, arid that the petitioner had a large family of children, who, with their father, were in great distress, and-he hoped the house would pause before it consent ed to alienante from the grandchildren so much valuable pro perty. He would admit that the petitioner had given his father just cause of offence, but still the grandchildren could not have offended. Under these circumstances he hoped the house would pause before it consented to the third reading of this bill. Mx. HuME was anxious that the house should not be led away from the object of the bill by the statement of the hon. member for Oldham, because the hill would not, in fact, do any injustice. With respect to what had been stated by the hon. member, he must say it would appear from that that the petitioner was an only son of Sir John Soane, and that on his death his children would become entitled to the property as heirs-at-law. The fact, however, was otherwise, for the eldest son, though now dead, had left a family, who would be the heirs-at-law of Sir John Soane, and therefore, if Sir John Soane were to die to morrow without a will, the petitioner or his children would not be entitled to one farthing of this property. Whatever rights, however, the petitioner .had, or could claim to have, were completely protected by a clause for that object which had been introduced into the bill, which reserved to him, and all other persons who might have interests, the right of suipg for all that he la di e i eo w n a l s d t c o la e i n th o i le du s e i r process John s o o f a l e w, to ttlrnalilstfehra ttth,. ha 4 in his own p.erspn to the two kouses Linc„c h ' i e b, where the ithisilluthwas to be kept, to trustee* theiefore see that the allegations in the pe tit ion Ni% accurate, and as the title - had been exami n ed in,",,, Lords, and as the committee up stairs had gone up, cussion of the bill, and heard Mr. George Soane tll after that were unanimously of opinion that 1 1 ° done to 4ny indiyidnal, he hoped, the bill would be - tithe without further discussion. f the b` Mr. Butscoz hoped that the third reading 0 . „ t a of be postponed, because, from the little he had het' e • day, he was of opinion that though no legal Wel yet that the case of the petitioners was a case o ship, and that the bill, if passed, would effect a injustice. He had not had an opportunity of going whole of the bill, but he looked with some surprise a t priation of so large a sum of money set aside for tion of these valuables, which might well be say( children if the collection was sent to the British hoped, therefore, that the third reading would be Sir R. PEEL never heard a weaker case for the of a bill of which there had been such ample present instance there was a gentleman of great had devoted his own money in the accumulatio n relics of art, and, by denying, himself those indel' persons in his situation of life generally enjoyet that valuable collection which he now sought to gift (and a most liberal one) to the public. All was an act of Parliament to put an end to any might arise as to the validity of that gift, which the country ought, in his judgment, to receive admiration of and thankfulness to the individual so liberal a use of his fortune. (Hear.) With power of bequeathing the museum, he (Sir 1? clause to propose which would reserve to Sir power, should he so think fit, of disposing, by his valuable collection to the British Museum, views of the hon. member for Stirrey would be ad Lord J. RUSSELL concurred in the sentiment the right hon. baronet, the member for Tamwortli, the proposition of reserving a discretion to Sir to the disposition - of the collection to the British completely meet the views of the hon. member for he hoped would induce that hon. gentleman to ' Opposition he might have to offer to the bill. After a few words from Sir S. WHALLEY, in bill, the petition was laid upon the table. Mr. HtAiE moved that Soane's Museum Bill be third time. Sir ROBERT PEEL proposed a clause, e nabli Soane to bequeath all his valuable relics and so' the British Museum ; after some discussion th e agreed to, the bill was read a third time and pas' e e l On the motion of Mr. Hawus, the Thames 'Tno u ' read a second time, and ordered to be committed. Mr. BYNG presented a petition for leave to bri authorise the payment of the salary of the chi Middlesex Sessions out of the county rates: committee. Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from the E 0 Company against the London and Greenwich Ra' Mr. Ser jeant PER am brought in a bill to caus 6 - regulating the retailing of wine, spirits, beer, Ireland.—Read a first time. Mr. COBBETT presented several petitions, and at Speaker left the chair. The Speaker resumed the chair at 5 o'clock. MONTGOMERY BOROUGH ELEcTioN• Mr. FINN appeared at the bar with the repor t mittee appointed to try the merits of the petiti ov return for this borough. It declared that Davi d was not duly elected, and ought not to have been burgess to sit for the borough; that neither the P r opposition to it, was frivolous or vexatious. Mr. FINN then moved a new writ for the room of David Pugh, Esq.—Ordered. EASTER RECESS. Lord ALTHORP gave notice that he would move d day, (or Thursday, if the state of business di' sooner,) that the house, at its rising, do adjourn week, the 15th of April. (Hear, hear.) f Lord ALTHORP then rose to move the order o Boing into a committee on the Church Temporali t ill. Mr. SHAW presented seven petitions—from lb' clergy of the diocess of Ossory-; from the derv" of Meath ; from the dioccss of Elphiu ; from the George, Dublin ; from the clergy of the diocc Ross; and from the dean and chapter of. Killeen , interference with church property in Ireland. They were read and ordered to lie on the table. Sir J. TYItELL gave notice, that to-morrow a question to his Majesty's Government re communications between them and some politic understood that the hon. member to whose sta. , subject he referred was ready to repeat that stateinee; Put the question to ascertain whether His Majes' would . deny it. CHURCH TEMPORALITIES (IRELAND' The order of the day for the house resolving mittee on this subject was read. On the gas Speaker do leave the chair, Mr. A. JOHNSTONE would move, before the sk chair, that the oath contained in the Catholic 1 - 0 11 taken by Catholics taking their seats in that 1, 9 4 " The present was, he thought, the fittest opportuu t ' the attention of the house to that subject. In doll lie should get credit for not being actuated by feeling, for he was only taking that course which hi s out to him. The oath to which he referred was made part of the bill for the purpose of preventing tholic members from interfering in any way in fla t ; to injure or weaken the church establishment e' Ireland. That such oath was understood to be vent Catholic members from taking any part in 03 % to the church establishment was the opinion of aA t bers of-that house. lie recollected that in the 135 , the late right hon. secretary for Ireland had cane ( of the hon. member for Tipperary to the subject feeling as to the meaning of that oath; and he a that in the last Parliament Lord Killeen and the for York both declared that they considered eat by their oaths, as Catholic members of that .1 101 from any discussion on such subjects. In the ment, when au hon. member (Mr. C. O'Dwyer) destroying the Irish church, he was immediately an hon. and learned civilian (Dr. Lushingtel l ‘ (Mr. Dwyer's) oath, as a Catholic member, Ile from doing anything which would tend to inito Protestant church establishment in England or withstanding these opinions, he found it was stil of some hon. members, who were Roman Oath part in matters which, as it appeared to him, the oaths they had taken at that table. Under stances, he felt it his painful duty to take the et pursuing. In the oath to which he referred the ber swore, amongst other things, "And I do h` disavow, and solemnly abjure any intention to sk sent church establishment as settled by law wit lll „,', He would not rest on the terms he had just r ci 'l next passage of the oath were these words, "..'ku declare, that I never will exercise any privilege , or may beCome entitled to, to disturb or weal;, 1' l i ' religion or Protestant government in the u; And I do solemnly, in the presence, of God, pre'': declare, that I do make this declaration, and e'lei in the plain and ordinary sense of the words of out any evasion, equivocation, or mental reset ever—so help me God." He would not say in could conscientiously take such an oath, and himself at liberty to tnterfere or take an active which tended to injure.or weaken the Protestar4 vernmcnt. Looking at the question in the lin, pact, he would say that the Protestants had pert, ci of it in admitting the Catholics to an equality o ` . . i and it was now the duty of the Catholics to Pe' t of it by observing the conditions on which th 7 given. He was sorry that it, should fall to his but he would withdraw the motion if the he' opinion that a more proper time would occur introduction; but it appeared to him that the proper one for the introduction of this rit, brought it forward without consulting any r` r , would now leave it to the house. He would O rs oath administered to Roman Catholic niecabe be read. The oath was then read at length. , ke g Mr. O'CoNrium. said the hon. member ta"' t iu with-the Catholics. There had been no ne but of Limerick, which hai been shamefully violate The Catholics had come to that house to de . r to be placed on terms of civil equality with th e ' low-subjects. They had asked for that onlY' have accepted anything beyond that even if ' (Hear, hear.) As to dispensing with an o h lieveethat.no person or persons had any su et between man and man. There were, which. ipight disspensed with and absolved I f t'gr. if the hon. member took an oath to pay big' o th sum of £5O, he could absolve him from such e li g reat i il- - - - --:-- - - - —T4i,BDl.tplailebrtlhch°edhdilieiraiadae:alleceructlnvieotihtu'.buleluitbi+heelietere:),loQetbeet'hrPheito:to:ll)ogco°l)eo:o4oo:o,fli-airjulslailld°lll.l3-eslexivi2c e l'st i t 1 f:i 4j ec.c:- 61 1 Irl i k ' e. le Il lzi )!Fillil.ll:l)4Asiirtae.°::ibilr:it h vit )ft .e e' e 'i i ;id lit4 h ar,l l: lB e s let 11al t_i 'll'i: t : '1 iiiirnthi andl9lll ,,, ewn' eo wa.ii' ,l.4 ftesugl'l cb,,r ra.eth e s w e t tl e r Ih'a 11 I: h. h. a re: l t ll o L ' e Y ia len w ibil i sn hian t, 3 7 0 °b ua ek p l 1: .0 1 oc ril. tst ebb i i e e : u b d iihdte jo bl ia a l l I . ° a ' . e'ierY a e cia se iLt iii i a l(i ii i Lineold - ow no ~,, 11 0 pow e tat n° 11k/ d 114 .4 c a P , °w et ; bir ag of •• rci o f it tali s ussion, 1 injustice teat hoties"nnlnents case o. . a t 'tr e ', e ff ec t s cr g t r h e reo g apioio.:Eanussc of go.i n ' at the ' eh a , , . 1 13 ofr the 1 t qprise p ' ored hi '''' not i r e for the b y Au „rebgion 1 vve d to 0, Rok.,uathlies, ritiib 1 111 1 pe tt ' , at t ,:e Catholic 11d be V tis tpoli e 't t i o ' r %vere 11°11 for the Pt i ce , 1 itI L . e than i 11110,d011 Aces ; , , n ,.._ e cours e to 3 indUlr at Lt l eme bef o • : • h i gl 1g• ktti re 1 3njoYe 'o- : , , ill, - 1 0111. aa . fight to P e a sV ( , ath e ,, clause ha c. All hotio '"l'h,a de r eembe: to anY ` lll ll o .l e th°11 L;t 1111° horts five with the oirAoohe tak e I) , idual Ich ° 0 1° ,i1 ;0 1 - 1 1'.1, °r the 8 0 With r t a r el),,, ° f l di4, llll "'DToN Sir 11-- ' 4 0 P l i Teeth, '• word h 7 Sir Jo j ill s or ; :i; I ;,,Itrh o g n w . ll ) , ll ,t had by dc" it , ' ' • , ole . c h - , non, i scum, btu th e 0 it t l eh ,_ , he di be au s ", ft% ? t ever a n7,Lake n irneut c'',lo`, tobe r ; " it n the • rvorth, 31 '4 1 ; erf e „ tl) t bel e , I I Sir Jo h clo , gilt e °r tak e g i ' e , ,„,_ or e , 1.,_„ par Ltish lhe'',i,,• ' !erase of b efore th, rber for .. 07 0 to tail. duty- and ( tan to l vt i Podi a ' of destr oold hn kept , he D i. uy, 0 sol tit l e r e, eXpr a i h i ; aennaabwi oillrgyo. : 011;4 if , L A .ll)oLree(trd:k e aa, a na t eewtulite,,io.lo:, : o l ,d),, , , ion - th e , L c A P'ed ~'L T . Do R p Safi d pas' e 'l 7 ' l Us .. " I ch he ;, ,es Til lit'e 114 41 "a to rin 'a nitted• 01 9 tip i e t tak e o e i t o briii ia D i 1 ipl e i natly g o re cbai r y c ol the th e na. n les.-- 11° aPo ss i not o h- a s • fo f ) te io tl e en tb "el the DeP t ,c 1 Part ra s a fOin ie e r t i ch Ralf 'oli tio th e , ni cousoliall , h ad n h ofth e v e r h opos , beer, a ll °I% teen carried ' "l4 he ere et tl tled and at 3 0 r ite latA dest rabl e e ab r ; i de . , h e ou th cic. ad th e I° l . that t " ;Ttoti. o f 0 1 ; ,1 wa, ll --yecl the rergr t o ts 1. ri i i ;earl:—_ "' petinee A the petio . I : ll 4 tll ;rief a t e h t e i t t i an s sus th tic t. ititli t - o lne et 4 Y act ' 0 alt the bor ° e tlte e . °f th e . h e r, 'oth C Ur( 4 'N, t ' i lol orn e en er,apow [ niocef', P at? e "2. il l . ' , not g i as 1 ass d i " to : it to re t i ., i 8 thlego Ldj oU rij , I 1 1, 4 , acce Provisi 0 '. , i4, 2 (-)0, to e i d. Its , ) : k I t s e t i l l 1 h t 8 1 e a t' i it f° ran ilkeo°P . eh l'h 1 ?;4 1 0.4' I nroW P i: f ' , Ai d eht ale . yof 1 L t res e ti os i Littti -'`'' De b l olitica e fi r. i og she , a o atenierl`,;, 4 11,. y, that mi d , 1 m a i est) ' t,,e,!tito rest pcuss To,',"t to '„ u • I% p r e I)3P° . 1 nr d g. A t Porgyise a I i N l i e . tse t ta p s hter e • °e:)° , . s t aij f f i 'ef''ri , ° , s ,af t ' tiltiit: te 9 ' ' 1 ': 4 4' 1 1: 111 ' o ett i ro i :i s t hi'it 84:ll°4 1 1 , 7 1 :111'11 aB'igli ci l l:11:1'8 1 c0 . ° B l l :lll4li't t t e° : e . eat t i s' li t sil'im:t t ri c ehrttld " titiles.r y i :a.ce° : l;4shurt d usiol I:eer i gd n atseY d isi' . eb ect, re tlie s rvatic L ~' Di' l' ''''lce b i i iien. 1 i dn e ( it bl:tul I:s i o it:1 Icr°1: 1,1 5: , L t ' ce: o gt: t :1:- 1 , 1 1 1. . , : ;;:l 'e l ; el 1::: : 4 ;1 4. ' . _trek ' 14', 441 .41 11 )111'i j k) : 4 'fi k li 1 It:B ll ll:ll'::l4t e •S 'llli o tiBtadtO sf eet a trttl e at:it n : C l:Bl)riti n S'lll It°Y.lQ. 1.-' :betir':ll;tl IreBlY;:i' interests tl:::ftt°i done 9rtijsrr°bPe oaf hr.l ntos:oeri I nealt Lilt:al ino l e a tid i itiii , ,c e oito , t ,j11,,,,ti5. ei Lk: ya. oi end ynje .wol:II: and entio,,te is t i is Be lle .e, et, vi. the h i ha i t M . lP fo t 4 tB babra deli l' ls e g, 'Pe;ll, ll4 s i t e t r L l 7 Y heal ' 0 ''' , I II : s s tip : u l t. eh t l i c e *e d n. t t h yf r 2 r e h d u e , ei ° f ut t th t ile n d the 11 , e ° 1 04 r 1 ok, ll t l ltrn,p its • ; t t er o ) , lY :; r : l 3 tA .of a for that the P ii re- P ,se tt4"t to i c t re tP 'l e Ife' L L l. ' l, 4 ti floit e e r t liontati i i ore 00 V trl o o to 3 7 greater J. or Ile t 1, 1)4 Y t A drY• Tha i still t - t'' ef °4 k ° 'ight ti - jatb° lic ' ', ‘ n, we t t e bei e , ' 1 1 Proe e h `Z e d it, an n der se lig ' , i ,Y th e a __ authe D COa l c . , „tr• ,f; 1827 stand the fe bi ti k t 41941 fir s Z n il ( . l ! 828 Lo 11 0 ' 17c e, ti t Paid , i tuts f to ' e o ° l 4 1 41 Of I:9 llclud int „ithied,O, • t ki kL eta c l7 7 Is. st r c 'L l i lief 1 1 ,,, 4 iyi or for 31 , Awl h id ~o t w t il in, lege `l,O t.' 1)0 1) 4 4CI ° x i ; ell i a . , 4, 0 ,, . e oublc ti ,ite L(t, 41 li e -„,,, , . kii4 ' 4 , he profP? it' ata„ a,r.) L e vor,?:,, •.\ Wa s 1 4 to an i o f tkvijo o ( l AL Thi 1341 ( 1 a pr re scrZti L tt - tRe of s t'rt of c and'x;f et, ' ' with a s hilling a ft , r 0 „ I tl li, what just 0.• 1 a .1 4 -1 1 of five I' co,il ' l l i a a s the fir taot fO t , ki4„ tr aus a Plund e Liaht ° llL ei,i t'i t t, it „ ac tion too r for il' to ll , °WEI be i pe f c is, 'te t t bßat forward y 0 rp , %,, A, a.ri: _ p e ou c ci , , fltahi e "aol,ent, tha t t , 6; *hi t • this fi fat - tk, 4' 5 0 thr a ta his a e 'lO . l' ciw il showing" ho- . 5 .0- tfi r I'l4 s Ur l ' C' e ,/ii Oat?, t ants of I/ i„ p re i , o ,., i 1 3 , u „'._ l . oath an( " qu est v o e', loYity l c': the tb r r h oll•_ . , 0 ,• , ?Ilk t,_ testants 00% of It b „0„,-tzriaseives wi 0: - r s . I. ...ifa h , sue ecipro4 D v of ,7p "c"`,,': If this t . 21;e cl oi I .: Y I " . aC t io L D-tric 8, Wit at tb' tV 51 1,1 q4 t th ?Deora„/ [s teal tr e . t , y til l , syste m levi3fro,,. ,:`, , k!bli si ' l L it wouli t heir o d 4 '.13 .t . 0 1 t lai d T t 'ent ; an ill' , ',IV' 1, ) % Peri, . s hands if b, ( 7 ,1 l ''l d t) ; t n , of this ei o,th, t o , 01 eli ee - ! ; ousid er ti ch I )°'l Ce r7 A t; te liki ltie first at L ied , fo r , 4.,tt would and a r f oul' o', ` 4 at P l id by air% ( I%l i c ii l''' . laatiou.cou