The Express.
London, England, 1848-06-29 00:00:00

given of its intentions by the hon. and learned mover. The
hon. member also complained of the absence of the Attorney-
General, the more especially as he had, in effect, takes the
bill out of the hands of the private member who had intro-
duced it.
Sir 0. GREY denied that the government had adopted
the bill. They had merely proposed to alter one part of it,
with a view of preventing the repealing action so far as
regarded the bulls and writings mentioned in the 13th
Elisareth.

After a short discussion'
Mr. WALPOLE said that it had taken him two whole
days to introduce the bill and he feared it was but imper-
fectly understood by the house. He was willing to secede
to inch portions of the bill as were reasonable, but should
resist all that portion which tended in his opinion to tamper
with the protestant character of our constitution. It was
his intention to support the present amendment.
Mr. NEWDEGATE had great respect for the opinion of
his hon. and learned friend, but what Le wanted was to pre-
vent such interference on the part of the papal see as nad
recently taken place in reference to the education scheme
for Ireland. He should, therefore, divide with has hon. and
learned friend the member for Dublin University if the ques-
tion went to a division.
dr. NAPIER observed that the clause as proposed to be
amended would leave the question doubtful as to those bulls
which previous to the act of Elizabeth were dealt with by
the common law.
Mr. J. S f UART supported the view taken by:Mr. Napier.
Altar a few words from Sir H. WILLOVOH BY and Sir 0.
GRES. in which the latter remarked upon the waste of time
occasioned by gentlemen who had been profitably employed
in the Court of Chancery all the morning coming down to
continue discussions which were already exhausted, and
recommended an immediate division,
Mr. HENLEY raid the difficulty arose from the absence
of the law officers of the crown,who, upon a question like the
one before them—on which an amendment suggested by them
was and ,r discussion—should be present to give the house
the benefit of their opinion, and moved that the chairman
report progress.
The committee divided on that motion—Ayes..loo
Noes..llo-4
The amendment of the Attorney-General was then again
put.
Mr. J. STUART complained that the effect of the amend-
ment would ha to leave the preamble of the aet of Elizabeth
to explain what was meant by this bill. He objected to that
on the ground of the inconvenience it would occasion. He
thought the personal observations of the right hon. gentle-
man (Sir G. Grey) as they referred to him (Mr. btuart)
were wholly unjustifiable.
Sir G. GREY admitted that he had expressed himself
strongly, feeling the great inconvenience resulting from the
practice he had alluded to. The objection urged by the hon.
and learned gentleman to the amendment would go to this
—that they should never repeal a part of an act of pulls-
meat without repealing the whole.
The committee again divided—Ayes ll3
Noes ll3
_ .

The numbers being equal, the chairman (hie. Bernal)
gave his casting vote in favour of the insertion of the words.
Sir. R. INGLIS recollected no instance in which, alter
such an equality of opinion, the measure hail proceeded
further during the same session. He should therefore move
that the chairman report progress, arid malt leave to sit
again.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER reminded
the committee that the amendment which, by the casting
vote of the chairman, had just been carried, had emanated
from the other side of the house, having been originally_pro-
posed by the hon. and learned member for Cambridge Uni•
versity ; be saw no reason for refuting to proceed with the
remaining clauses of the bill.
After a few words from Mr, Nzwrinos.rz and Mr.
HENLEY,
The house divided—Ayes llO
hoes lll-1
The CHAIRMAN then put the question on the next clause,
when much laughter was created by the entrance into the
house of Sir It. Inglis, who was absent from the division,
and who explained that he went to consult the highest
authority in that house as to the course pursued by the chair-
man, whose opinion he wished to hear on the point.
Mr. BEIINAL said that, without reference to the re-
cords of the house,
. he could not say that a similar event had
ever occurred during the many years he occupied that chair.
Mr. J. STUART submitted that they ought to proceed no
further with the bill.

Lord 11. VANE thought it hard that hon. members
should so factiously oppose a measure which could not be
brought forward on any other day of the wee►.
Mr. HUDSON urged postponement; and
Sir GREY, pointing to the clock (20 minutes after 5),
sugg,:sted to the hon. member for Youghal whether it would
not be b-tter, looking to the tone of the house u well u
the hour, to give up the idea of proceeding further with the
bill that day.
Mt. ANSTEY refused to do so, conceiving that if they did
not go on with the bill now it would be shtlred for the
session.

Mr. HUME seconded the appeal of the Secretary of
State ; and atter some conversation in the same strain,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY moved, as an amendment on
page 3, line 10, of the clause,

Provided always, ani be it declared, that nothing in this enactment
relating to an set passed in the first year of Queen Elizabeth, chapter
one, shall authorise or render it lawful for any person or persons to
addrrn, bold, stand with, set forth, maintain, or defend the authority,
preeminen:,t, rnwer, or Jurisdiction, xpiritnal or ecelesiantleal, of
any foreign ce, prelate, pinon, state, or potentate, within the
United m of Great Britain and Ireland, nor shall the same
extend further than to the repeal of the particular penalties and pun-
ishments therein referred to, bat in all other reopens the law shall
continue the same as if this enactment had not been made. Provided
always, and be it declared, th it nothing in thi• enactment contained
relating to an sot 13 Elie., cep. 2, shall authorise or render it lawful
(many person or persons to import, bring in, or put in execution
within this realm, any bull, writing, or instrument from the 'tie of
Rome ; and that in all respects, save as to the penalties or punish-
ments impo-ed by the mid act, the law shall continue the same as if
this enactment had not been made.

Mr. ANSTEY said he had no objection to those provisoes
if so altered as to substitute the words " consequent there-
on," for " therein referred to," in the first; and " conse-
quent upon any violation of the said act," for " imposed by
the said act, ' in the second.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY refused to make the proposed
alteration.

SirG. (xitttY and Mr. P. Woou objected:to the:provisoes in
either shape, as they wculd only leave the law u it was re-
garding the e'atutable offence.
Mr. ANSTEY (it being within five minutes of six) moved
that the chairman report progress, with leave to sit again
next Wednesday, which being agreed to,
The house resumed and adjourned.