The Express.
London, England, 1853-07-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL P.

HOUSE OF LORI/S.-MI I; &WAY. JVLT 21.

Loan CaLscm.i.os took Ai. .eat M o'clock.
!ABASH VESTRIES (No. 2) BILL.—SPITALFIELDS
TO BRUNEI/ITCH IMPROVEMENTS BILL.
Them Mc were eterwetively remi a .eeoad time.
COPTHOLDS BILL.
Thu bill was rood a third time and pared.
ENTAILS (SC)TLAND) BILL.
Thi. Dill was rood • sound time.
BANKRUPTCY (SCOTLAND) BILL.—BATTERSEA.
PARK BILL.—WESTMINSTER-BRIDOE BILL.
Timm bills were socually read a third time asd pawed.

LAND REVENUES BILL
Tit* more is this bill WSJ roveriv.4 *tth anicadmen
COINAGE OFFENCES (COLONIES) BILL.

TRANSPOUTATION BILL.
71la bill was woad • third use and pawed.
COLONIAL CHURCH REGULATION BILL.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY, in moving the com-
mittee on this bill, said that great inconvenience had been
felt in many of the colonies, especially in Australia, from the
waist of a proper administfatim of the affairs of the church,
the laws of this country not being applicable to the colonies.
Many attempts had been made towards etfecting this ob-
ject ; and there was a general concurrence is the fooling
that some legislation was necessary, end that in any plan
which might be propused the lay members of the church
about.' have a considerable share in the administration of
Its affairs, and that nothing should be done which should
have say tendency to separate the church in the colonies
from the church is the rautticr country. Those objects hail
been kept strictly i• view in framing the present bill, and
he had taken care that none t f those jealousies which
oedinazdy arose in the (Monies should be created by this
After a few words from Eul WALDZOILATri, whit l were
Laudable,
Lord oIONTEAGLE said the problem seemed to be
how to give the means of selleeeernment to the colonial
church with the least possible ri.k of inconvenience. He
did not understood the term " regolations" in the bill. No
regulation should be made which would be at variance
with the Book of Common Prayer, or which would alter
the Thirty-nine Article.. Latter this clause it would be
still open to the sysed to raise controversies on
matters of faith. Ile would therefore suggest the
adoption of words which had received the sanction
of the colonial bishops themselves, in a memorial
addressed to Sir J. l'akingtoo, from Australia, namely,
that the power to frame laws for the discipline and manage-
ment of the church should in no means estend to any in-
terference with or alteration of the doctrines and forms of
worship.
The Bishop of LONDON thouaht the bill effectually pro-
vided against the dangers pointed out by his noble friend.
His noble friend was afraid lest the Sj nod should take upon
them greater power than was intended to be given by the
power of making regulations. But if they had not the
power of making revelations, there would be no use in
these assemblies at all. He hoped that their lordship would
pass the bill.
The Earl of DARROWDY said that the bill seemed to
him to omit that which was its very object, namely, the
providing of some tribunal for getting rid of improper
clergymen. (Hear, hear.)
TOO Archbishop of CANTERBURY said that not only
was there no specific provision for that purpose in the bill,
but it was intentionally left out, because it was considered
that this was a matter which would be better left to those
la the colony, than that they should constitute such • tsi-
banal here, at so great • distance from the colony.
The Bishop of SALISBURY said the bill was intended
to be merely permissive. It was to enable the members of
the church of Eoglawl to do such thiop as the members of
all other religious communities could do. It was a case,
therefore, in which they were not to look for compulsory
power, either from the local assembly or the crown, or,
least of all, from the imperial legislature, to give force to
these regulations.
The Earl of DERBY said that in that ease the synods
would have the same power which the dissenting bodies
lead, namely, would be able to deprive clergymen of their
benefices.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE said that was most care-
fully guarded against, not only by the fourth clause, but
alseby the way in which the first clausewas dravrn,from which
it would be seen that these synods would have no power
whatever over or against the laws of this country or the colo-
nial laws. Everything of a compulsory or enacting Ware
was carefully avoided throughout the bill.
The Earl of HARROWBY did not think that any
answer had been Riven to his objection.
The Bishop of SALISBURY said be conceived the state
of the case to be this. Every church bad in itself a natural
and inherent right of regulating its own discipline. There-
fore every church had the right to make arrangements as to
the manner in which its own discipline should be exercised
unless tbat_power should be prevented by extraneous impe-
diments. They believed that the church in the colonies
had the right to exercise discipline of this kind,
bat certain imperial laws put such incoeveniences
is the way that that power wee not capable of being
exercised. The object of the bill was to remove those iNi•
pediments, and to give power to memblies to the colonies
to define the rules under which **prim amid Co exer-
cised. He did not say that those synods osaidlotod a court
themselves, for such a court virtually existed already. The
sy
nods were to lay down the regulations under which the
woo to miry eat that inherent power or discipline
erhleb h peammed. nom regulations wore to bays the
mulles of the sow, sot that web 'motion gays they soy
Wtrioo. but OW It we that ossookal forte, which was
en the easeeleatm

Mauld HARROWDY said that after all he had
heard it to hint that the bill ought *et to pus in
its
~leee Sipe.
Basket si OXFORD said the church in the colonies
wee ei ie leallied as a purely spiritual body, while the
Omni at Mao wee • mixture of persons having different
spiritual owl temporal rights. The bill would give no
power to apses clergy ben any civil Status which they
Night puma There were taw eases in the colonies of
'kW Wing rinfissel el basedees ; the great body received
ftLitda or saistriss, so keg es they held the license of the
el des dimes c bat whim that &use wu withdraws,
*orop woe eleigedt els. Ms beg bean felt to be a great
biseeidpi mad it we theseesse proposed to give the syaods
such pouts of dissigitale soda shwa at home would pommel
if it wen SUM allow wilh *estate. The synods would
have no to INIIIIMS dame chip who wen is posses-
sion 'ef whisk were eivi rights. The bill was
confined to ssguistles spiritual Mahn. He valid not
iront ffirilm which had been thrown out of
giving essissia marts in this country juris-
ction over the shwa tr the colonise. This would
M an interferes** with the eights el the Weans,
and would not he melted with laver. To eseablieb
such scales iastisol mem to the Weals wadi hew the
effect of exciting the *leafy et ether seileteas beam% who
would we in It ea eneespt te elevate the ebaseh es a pe-
destal above tbs.. By awe* eieleibe the 'glutei
ebarebes, as it wen, in the tormatisa et mark the bill
went as to as it was safe to proceed in that dilution. It
would Mrsagthen the cherish of England by saatang it to
lay down rules foe Its own conduct; eagle Impel tbelsoare
would count to it. It was obliged tat the bill gays
power to an ecclesiastical body ; bat it only gave that
power to the whole body of the church, lay as well as den-
ad, by agreement s
he themselves. It was to only
mesas of enabling the slush la the colonies to manage
its ow. affairs.

The Earl of CHICHI/Ma 11116•11111pri
the satire power of depriving • arm= sr bb 4114,1112
=ntly of its ersolessents. lbw& it objectless*
ye • new power like this Ms • NSW body.
The Berl of DERBY add it monen le hint that OM
bill mould mitigate the umbsibia wbbb bat
Wiliest* boss ..._card eese libumani inmates. W
regard W than who mew r posemeles of what men
swanks* to a bereft la We eemaily. be it de-
sirable that it amid be mere (dearly erg hat the
brio& wen aft to writhe Ile
_power of segandlit ear this
slam albs dingy. • wing sWese oft-avid
~
%mid M.
twat, babe that Indl aims. The dun Maw
et.saly rekerisi aim where the my
roar; Ist it would be bort to limit the pees la
the way
The DakePnIi&CASTLE said the bill had been ONO
eiderahly altered elms it was first printed, on his
; and he thought, as it stood now, that the 411:=
wee seneesseary. If the sable earl (Derby) ambit y►
.sad the Mt dame, he would see there wee se Jaw of
web ea interpretation being pat spelt the power of the
sped, a he anticipated.
Tlis Bishop of LONDON repeated the &manna given
by to Bishop of Oxford, as to the limited powers conferred
ag the bal.
Tit Lead CHANCELLOR suggested that the objection
We be remmed by the insertion of • few words at the
sal of shwa 3 ; te the effect---" or deprived of any civil
Vista whisk he easy be by law entitled."
wee agreed to, and the clause as amended was
"Cid of

surred the missies of a por-

ties of the ant hawse.
The Bishop of OXFORD said that the bin was the see
salt of very eared deliberations, at widish elm et
the North American church, and epieend
from Australia and the Cape had rsisteL OW
pressed the wishes of the colonial church, aid stw
lightly to be altered by their lordships. It dolly
the disabilities of the imperial law, which pnwsgaTE
eolonial Whops horn meeting together u eyneile r thy
thought it desirable, to mush for the geeddtiesllaeehi
but it gave no powers of compelling Or d
legally enforcing the decisions of seal the
was already preeticall at work the dohs =
States, and had been (send wry pee* kgsemete unity
of feeling and &aim. His trusted, Swam that their
lordships would not allow say lam thrashed objections
be weigh mildest the Wiij eraidesoll that nothing is
the world would tern eras In orattrit r ramestion be-
tween the *Much at beim sod Id doe alueldi, than this
verynederate cheek upon henVide4mmentrieides.
After seem conversation the amsalesnt was withdrawn,
and the dense was agreed IR
On elm* 6,- which peseides that none of the ens or
regulation of the noel, shall be at variance with the
Desk of Osamu Prayer, or the 39 articles of faith,
Lod lIOIITRAOLE found fault with the clause, be-
came it provides against the discussion of doctrines of
faith, er usurers the supremacy of the crown.
The Arelibilts. of CANTERBURY said the words pro-
posed to be ineseted would render the clause vague and en-
certain, and le would ash taller that the clause passed
as it steed.