The Press.
London, England, 1858-07-03 00:00:00

630

questration, the rector would remain abroad to
keep out of the way of his creditors, leaving no
provision for the due service of his church, and
with no power in his diocesan to do more than
appoint a curate with a maximum income of
1001. per annum. This evil, as the Archbishop
of CANTERBURY stated, had long been known to
the right reverend bench, and efforts made to
devise some amendment of the law which should
be at once safe and sufficient. These attempts,
it was hoped, might ripen into an Act during the
next session of Parliament.

THURSDAY.

The Prime Minister came back., happily con-
valescent and courteously hopeful that public
business had not suffered from his compulsory
absence. His first care was to settle the long-
pending Oaths question, and he undertook the
task with an evident perception that it was very
delicate, and rather disagreeable. Of the two
Bills which stood for second reading on the sub-
ject, Lord DERBY confessed that he preferred—
or rather least disliked—that introduced by the

Earl of LUCAS. This measure simply provides,
that when any Member of either House comes
to the table to be sworn, and professes inability
to take the usual oaths from conscientious scru-
ples, the House may modify the formula in such
manner as it may deem expedient in order to
obviate the difficulty. Lord LYNDHURST natu-
rally preferred his own Bill, but would not em-
broil the question by forcing it upon the House.
The debate was accordingly taken on Lord
LUCAS'S proposition. Some hours were there-
after spent in discussing the Bill, but as the issue
was foreknown, the speeches on either side,
though numerous, were short. Arguments were
very slightly urged—since what is the use of
pleading a cause whereon the verdict is already
recorded I)—but a few honest and consistent
opinions were expressed, and protests recorded
against the measure, which, in a manner however
disguised, in a degree however mitigated, still
effectually destroys the Christian character of the
Imperial Legislature. But in simple truth the
position now surrendered had already been
undermined. TONI DUNCOMBE had run a sap in
one fatal direction by discovering that Baron
ROTHSCHILD, without taking any oaths at all,
might sit and vote on a Select Committee, and
by a parity of reasoning on a Committee of the
whole House. Some astute lawyers of the party,
it was rumoured about the lobbies, had de-
tected some wonderful virtues in the con-
junction accidentally introduced in the ex-
isting Act. Elected members—so ran their
hypothesis were forbidden, under penal-
ties, to sit and vote," unless they had previously
taken the oaths. But, in spite of this inhibition,
they might at their pleasure, and with perfect
impunity, either sit without voting or vote with-
out sitting. The Peers avoided future dispu-
tation by abandoning a fort which had become
already honeycombed. A considerable majority
obeyed the Premier's reluctant signal, and ac-
cepted the principle of a bill which declares that
if the House of Commons—some at least of
whose members are Christian—wish to admit a
Jew into their assembly, the question shall be
left to their own decision.
FRIDAY.

Church-rates were discussed for eight hours.
Constant iteration has worn all the arguments on
the subject threadbare. As a motive for repeal-
ing the rate, its opponents assert that the subject
agitates the country, and have laboured most
industriously to manufacture an agitation in
order to justify their assertion. Their success has
proved but indifferent. Their Lordships recog-
nized the importance of the subject by the length
of their debate; and, finally, settled the question
for the present year by voting 187 to 36 against
the scheme for robbing the Church.