The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-04-22 00:00:00

white the carriers were waiting, what wu to become of the
sew% ants

Ordered to be printed.
ROMAN CATHOLIC'S OF IRELAND.
Mr. CAREM' presented a petition trout the c 'idiotic% of the I
Want y of Wexford, praying for entancipation.--Ordered to be ;
printed.
Mr P. BURDETT presented a similar petition from the parish
of St. Audeon'a, Dublin.
Mr. CURTEIS presented a petition trout the hop-growers of
Saws, praying for an alteration in the duty on hops.
SCOTOII CURRENCY.
Petitions against any alteration in the currency of Scotland were
presented from Linlithgow by Sir A. Hope ; trots six parishes in
Aberdeen, and three in Perth. by Captain Gordon; and from
VAynton, by Lord A. Hamiltor..
ABOLITION OF NEGRO SLAVERY.
Petitions fur the abolition of slavery were presented from Borrow.
stonnese by Mr. M. Grant; by Mr. F. Buxton, from the second
Associated Congregation of Donee, and horn ten parishes; also
from IYhitehaven, by Mr. Curves ; from Mount Melick, by Sir
H. Parnell; and trots Wells, by Mr. Dickenson..—Ordered to be
loaned.

CORN LAWS.
Lord A. HAMILTON presented • petition from the tailors of
Ulasgow, praying for an alteration in the Corn lows.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.
Ms. S. RICE presented a petition, signed by ten Peers and a
large number of the most respectable commoners of Ireland, pray.
ing for a repeal of the penal enactments against the Catholics of
that country. The petitioners stated that the advantages that had
been expected to arise from the proposed embarkment of British
capital in that country. were entirely destroyed by these Acts being
ellowed to remain in existence. Two petitions were also presented,
one from the Catholic and the other from the Protestant inhabitants
of Kilberry ; and from the Protestant and Catholic linen-bleachers
of Belfast to the same effect.—Ordered to be printed.
POSTAGE OF IRELAND.
Mr. S. RICE said that he rose to 'resent • petition from o highly
respectable class of individual*, the merchants of Belfast, pray.
Mg for the equalization of the rate of Postage in England sad ,'
Ireland. The grievance of which they complained was, that at
present the Irish letters were subject to • separate charge under
each post.otice, and the consequence was, that it acted as a severe
eteck upon the mercantile correspondence of that country. In
order to show the dimsrity that mined, it would only be necessary
to Cat, that where one shilling and four pence was charged in Eng.
land, the sum demanded in Ireland was two shillings and two
pence. The irregularity complained of also proceeded in an inverse
ratio as the distance from the capital increased. fur in Dublin, the
principal seat of wealth and opulence, the hardship was barely felt;
but in the more remote counties the operation was most severe.
Besides it was a violation of one of the articles of the Union, which
Lad contemplated an alteration of the practice in question by a
Treasury Order. He should be' lad to hear from his Majesty's
hl:r.isters, if it was their intention to take the subject into their
eonsideration.
Sir J. NEWPORT rose to bear tsaatimony to the hardship corn.
plained of. The lion. Baronet said that a Inter from London to
Modern paid one shilling and three pence halfpenny, while a let-
ter to Kerry, the same number of miles, paid two shillings and two
pence, a practice which on every principle of justice ought nor to
remain any longer in existence. If it could be remedied by a
Treasury Order, it afforded thestronger ground for complaint that a
remedy had not been afforded.
Mr. WALLACE was for some time inaudible in the gallery.
tie was understood to say that the Parliamentary Commission of
which he was a member, had had the Irish Post.otfice under
their consideration, but were obliged to forego the inquiry until an
et!..ee more immediately requiring their investigation was disposed
of. lie (Mr. Wallace) would say, that the Committee saw no 'Ta-
ttoo for the difference which existed, and would recommend an alte-
ration. (Hear.) He was perfectly aware that for 140 mile!' in Ire-
Lied the amount of postage was equal to that from London to Edin.
burgh, which was 400, and therefore that the commercial trainee.
tines of Ireland were much affected by the regulation as it stood at
orteter.t. Ile would only repeat, that when the matter came before
the Commission, they would recommend the alteration in question.
Mr. C. 11. HUTCHINSON said, that some years since he had
toilet the attention of the House to the subject under considers.
non. The Commission of which the Right lion. Gentleman (Mr.
Wallace) was a member had done so much good fire Ireland, that
he should be most sorry to say an thing in that House in the w-y
of complaint ; but he was compelled to state, in commo
rei
common with his
Hon. Friends the Members for Vaterford (Sir J. Newport) and Li-
merick (Mr. S. Rice), that the regulation, as it at present existed,
was a great grievance upon various parts of Ireland. Some years
ago, when he had complained to the House on the subject of
rite regulation of the Irish Post-office, he (Mr. Hutchinson) was
then told that they were obliged so to act by law. There were two
eases which he wished to mention to the House. A poor Irish
labourer, working in England, having to send home any small
I.IIW of money, did st by means of the Poet.othee. and the Irish
Pat-office charged double postage. while an invoice of goods was
only charged as a single letter. He hoped thwefore that the neces-
sary alteration would take place.
Air JOHN BRYDOES said • re:Jed a.
The petition was then ordered to be toted.
DUTY ON ALS.
Me. SPRING RICE presented a petition from the Inhabitants
of tae city of Cork, praying for a rednetwo of the duty on coals to
1 reland.—Ordered to be printed.
COURT OF CHANCERY.
Mr. SYKES said that belted to present a petition from an indi-
vidual, complaining of an abuse in a Court of Justice. In doing so
he would not adopt the energeticlanguage of the Hoo. Member ter
Aberdeen (Mr. Hume), at the same time he must say, that he
( Mr. Sykes) did not very much differ with him as to the opinion he
had so expressed. Though he would not say that the Court of
Chancery was a curse, yet he would say, without any disrespect to
t.!e Noble Lord who presided over it, that the Court of Chancery
less a public nuisance, and would continue so until the abuse and
corruption that existed in it were reformed. The petition which he
had the honour to present to the House came from a Mr. Richard
Garland, a gentleman in a particular situation of life. He (Mr.
near.) had long known him as • most faithful, honourable, and
honest man in his profession as a solicitor, for no less a period than'
twenty-five year& The petitioner stated that he was a solicitor in
the Court of Chancery, and that he had been concerned in that
office in taking out a commission of lunacy against a certain bull-
wetual, and in pursuance of his duty on that occasion he hail
psid many sums of money out aide own pocket. The gravamen of
the charge of the petitioner, however.wei that his regular bill of costs
was taxed and paid in 1814, and that the whole business was allowed
to he re-opened in 1028. a period of 12 years after the bill had been
so finally adjusted. The petitioner practised in Yorkshire, anti his
business in London had been carried on by an agent, according to
the usual practice. On receiving the order of review of taxcion
lie immediately repaired to town, and found that the clerk of the
agent was dead, and that the necessary papers could not be found.
Ile &retitled the Master from day to day on the subject of the re.
taxation, and eventually the Master determined that only three
shillings should be struck off that bill, which had so undergone
molar taxation twelve years before. The petitioner further stated
Mutt, if he was to be subject to such • practice, he must be a
reined man, from the time and expense arising from it; and
prayed the ouse to render him relief, and also that when it should
take the Chancery Report into consideration,sny proceeding upon it
shoult: he made to meet his case.
The'IItOLICITOR.GENERAL said that the Hon. Member
(Mr. Sykes) having given him an intimation of his intention to
present the petition, he was bound to attend the call of the lion.
Gentleman. But before entering Into the subject of the petition,
1,1 must say that there existed • systematic plan to run
down the Lord Chancellor. (lime.) First came the Honourable
Member for 3lontroee Olt Hume), who presented a petition be.
cause a penile' was sent to gaol for not answering to a bill of fore-
•dunire which had been tiled against him. Then came the lion.
Member for Hull (Mr. Sykes). to hard down the Lord Chancellor,
because after a few years he hal ordered a rem:chin of a bill of
cone under particular eircumetancee. lie (the nolicitor-Gencral)
could not but consider that the petitioner made nut a very awkward
evictor himself in.his petition, anti which, if he had hod the revisal
of it, be would not have dtowed to have appeared. He acknow-
ledged that he sued out a ediumission of lunacy against a particular
individual, and that he committed en illegal act in the discharge of
that duty. Me was conserned for die several patties hathat emir,
and one of the charges against Mr. Garland was, that he had re.
c:ived moneys upon which he ought to have paid interest, but
wbieh he had not done. The illegal act, however, with which ha
charged him, and which appeared on his own petition, was, that
he had taken a bond front the parties to indemnity himself for all
sums expended in the prosecution of the suit beyond the taxed
chats, and that was contrary to law—for clients were not con.
pelted to pay beyond the aunt ordered by the Court. It was under
those circumstances that the petitioner, hitting been employed by
Loth parties, obtained the uncontrolled taxation of the bill of costs.
The eminnh tee of the lunatic having died, • new committee was ap.
rioted, and then it was that the review in question took place.
are bud Chancellor had thought it right to determine in all
casts when • solicitor was concerned for both parties,that on an ap-
plication from either. his conduct might be made the subject matter
of review. Upon that principle the Lord Chancellor had acted
(sod he held the notes of his judgment in his hand) in the case be.
fore the House; he considered that Mr. ElarinA had obtained
taxation of his bill of costs unfairly, and that therefore it ought to
Ire made the subject of reamation. What, therefore, was the
Mate of the cote P Why. that the petitioner, in his calling of an
attorney, hoeing unfairly obtained taxation of a bill of costs, the
lord Chancellor ordered it to be reviewed ; and that was one of the
curses of the Court of Chancery—the individual in question bev-
ies obtained that which • was not controlled by any of the parties
intersatedin the proper administration of the lunatic's estate. Ile
(the Solicitor.Getierat) wondered very much that the Honourable
Member (Mr. Sykes) did not content himself with presenting the
petition only, as he had not made himself master of the subject ;
and he must say that the petition was any thing but a proof of the
ground he hail laid, on which to rest so grave a charge. In con.
elusion he would only say, that the Lord Chancellor would have
been guilty of a high dereliction of his duty if lie had not said that
11. tae bills should be again taxed, and that hecauee the taxation in
the fire: instance had been unfairly obtained.
Mr. HUME Raid that the lion. and Learned Gentleman (the
SolicaorMeneral) having alluded to what had fall -n fro I/ him on
• fanner night, he taunt say, that hating taken time to deliberate
OA the calumny, or by whatever denomination lion. Gentlemen
were pleased to call it, upon the most deliherate consideration
be repeated the observation he had then made, for what
could be said of an institution lice the Court of Chancery,
which denied justice to millions. Ile would call upon every
Member of that House who were so anxious to put down
buddy torture, to put down such a system of mental torture

u was inflicted by the pteceedings of the Court of Chan-
cery. Ile called upon the House to put down what was described
by the Hon. Member (Mr. Sykes) as a nuisance; which, under the I
semblance of administering justice, was only a source of evil, in-
joetice, and inequity ; and which swallowed up the time and money
of the unfortunate individuals who resorted to it. Iri reference to 1
the period that had elapsed between the taxing of the coats in 11114,
and the re-,mening of the cause in 1026, the Hon. and Learned •
Gentleman (the Solicitor-General) had called it a few years. He
should he glad to know how many of those few years he (the At-
torney-Oeneral) expected to have in his life time. (Hear and a
laugh.") According to his calculation, if a man could live to the
age of Methwielem, he would barely be able to see an end to a suit
in Chancery. The lion. Member fur Surrey (Mr. Sumner) had said
that the Court of Chancery was a blessing to the country ; all he
(Mr. Hume) ?ould say was, God preserve him from such a blessing.
and he was only sorry that the lion. Member was absent from the
House upon the present occasion, he should have liked to have
heard from hint whether or not he had altered his opinion. The
Court of Chancery was formed for the administration, of justice and
eq_uity where the law could not reach, but it had totally a contrary
effect. It was hopeless to expect ether the one nr the other. All
it afforded was hope deterred, anxious procrastination and mental
torture, from year to year. The justice of the Grand Seignor was
far more merciful. (A laugh.) Here summary justice was af.
forded, and death inflicted without torture, and it was better that a
man should so die, than by the mental agony oceasintied by a Chan-
cery suit. The lion. Member for Surrey,(Mr. H. Sumner) had
said that he (Mr. Hunie) and other Members of that House were
to blame for allowing the nuisance to exist. lie begged to say that
he repelled such an accusation. for there had not been one measure
brought forward for inquiry Into the Court of Chancery which he
had no: supported. From year to year he had been in the habit of
doings°. What was, however, to ue expected, when his Majesty's
Ministers and the Member for Surrey voted against those who pro-
posed enquiry? The statement of the lion. Member (Mr. H.
Sumner) was false. (Hear.) lie said false, because it was not
emeietent with truth. (Laughter.) The Hon. Member, and those
who voted with him bed no tight to take credit so themselves when
they screened inquiry. He (Mr. Hume) would ask any Hon.
Member to refer to the Report on the table from the Commissioners
of Inquiry into the Court of Chancery, and took at one single
line. It would there be found that no less a sum than
thiety-nine millions of money were locked up In that Court ; a
sum which no doubt formed a very pretty little nest egg for
the present Chancellor of the Exchequer or his 'successor.
It was, he contended, a nuisance to the country. As early as the
year 1756, the surplus funds of the Court of Chancery amounted to
two millions and a half ; but since that period they have gradually
increased to the enormous aunt of thirty-nine millions. What a
mass of good might have been effected, had that money been dis-
tributed amongst the persons who were entitled to it ! He feared,
however, that as long as the present Lord Chancellor existed, those
treasures would be locked up from those to whom they. belonged.
Where there were such delays, under the mask of justice and
equity, he was justifiable in denominating that Court a curse to
the country. He protested against the House being put off from
year m year front the examivation of the Report ; for if such was
to be the case. they had better abolish the Court altogether. There
wit nora single man, out of that House, to whom he had spoken
upon the subject of the Court of Chancery. and who bad had un-
tnrtunately anything to do with it, who had not told him that he
k had given to it its proper appellation, and that it was productive
to the suitors of nothing but misery, vexation, and ruin.
Mr. GREEN said a few words, which were inaudible in the
Pneri•
Mr. SYKES said, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (the
Solidtor-General) hail made out no case against the petition. Id hat
' round had he for Raying that there was illegality in the mode of
taxation ? It was true that he was a solicitor for two parties, but
not for two opposing parties. if he meant to represent that as a
grievance, lie (Mr. Sykes) could only say that, by the Report upon
the table of the House, the propriety of the practice was admitted.
• The Hon. and beamed Gentleman said that the circumstance hap-
• pened only a few years ago—did he call 12 years a few But in
that, however, he was perfectly consistent; for in the Court in
' which he practised they reckoned time, not by pears, but by genera-
tions. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Upon the whole, he thought
• that the allegations in the petition had not been answered.
• The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that upon the very face
of the petition was the fact of an illegal proceeding, and he
felt somewhat surprised, therefore, that any Hon. Member should
have presented it to the House. With respect to re-taxation, it
was the practice, not only of the Court of King's Bench but of
• every Court in the kingdom. If a bill had been taxed and paid,
and it was subsequently discovered that there was anything unjust
in the charges, it was re-taxed. The practice, he repeated, was
common to every Court in the kingdom. When he showed that
the petitioner had preferred an illegal claim, he thought he had
' made out a very strong case against the petition.
The petition was then ordered to he printed.
ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.
Lord MILTON prevented petitions praying for the abolition of
slavery in the II est India Colonies, from Higham Ferraro, In
• Northamptonshire, from Brickhouse2.and from Cutherstone.

SUPPI.V.
Mr. BROGUEN brought ap the Report of the Committee of
Supply.
Upon the motion that the House should agree with the Com-
mittee hi granting the sum of 11,0001. for defraying the expense Of
proclamations In Ireland—
Mr. HUM E rose and said the proclamations might be just as
well published at a much less expense. The fact was, however,
that at present those proclamations were made the medium of bri.
bing the newspapers in Ireland. Ile had moved for a return of the
number of stamps used by each newspaper in Ireland, and by corn.
paring their circulation, he discovered that so far from giving the
proclamations to those papers which circulated most extensively,
the very reverse was the fact. (Hear, hear.) fie could prove that
the l'a!riot was originally established by Wellesley Pole, during
his Secretaryship in Ireland, for the purpose of opposing the Cor.
,respondent, and the original agreement was, that 1200/. a
.7ear was
to be paid to the proprietors of the former journal. Since that period
they had been paid nearly at the same rate ; but lately a reduction
took place, and it was now somewhat between 11001. and 9001. per
annum. The Correspondent had since come round for a bribe of
2,0001. He should be. able to prove the payment of those sums by
persona in the Secretary's office. They were also allowed to charge
for articles inserted from the London Gazette, and one paper made
a charge of 000/. under the head of " News from the London Ga.
:idle.' If lion. Members examined the printed paper, they would
find that the same sum had been paid in each year. lie was anxious
to examine how the country papers fared, and soon discovered that '
papers of small circulation received large sums for proclamations,
while papers in large circulation got no proclamations at all. The
Carriek's Mornine Post received 1301. per annum, and, what was
most singular, received it through the hands of a Member of Par-
liament. In the year 11122, s reduction had taken place, and since
then the amount of money distributed in that shape had been less
by a fifth than before. The Athlone Herald received 1131. a year
for those advertisements, and yea it consumed in the year only 1,900
stamps. The Pa/riot, with a yearly con..umption of 134,000 stamps!,
received for advertisements 8321., while to the krening Mail, with
a rm.umption of 3410,000. not a single advertisement was given.
The Napo Conriiiatime, with a consumption of 16,100, received
1151., while the Weekly Hegrrier, with a sale of 159,000, received
not a single farthing. ll'as it possible, he would ask, to permit
such proceedings to continue ? The object was, to make public
the proceedings of Government, and was it the proper way to effect
that object to give the proclamations to those papers which had
the least circulation ? The obvious inference was, that they were
given as bribes to the public press. The Hon. Member quoted
many richer instances where large sums had been given to papers
in small circulation, and asserted that if the House would join him
in resisting the vote, the government in Ireland would go on much
better for the future. The Hon. Alen:cher next adverted to the
gnat of 12,0001. annually to the Wide-street Board, and said that
that Board sent its advertisements exclusively to the same papers
as had 'teen thus paid by Government, which he supposed was to
make tip the deficiencies caused by the reductions to which he had
alluded. The Hon. Member (Mr. Ellis) opposite, in his character
of Master in Chancery, adopted the same principle. For these
reasons he thought if the House conceded the vote, it might justly
be cmirged with malversation of the public money. Ile was .te-
volved to take the sense of the House upon it, unless the Right
lion. Osndeman (Mr.Goulburn) could show that the Government
is Ireland weld nee adept the mama manner of publishing their
proclamations as was prevalent in England.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT suggested that an arrangement might
be made satisfactory to all parties, by reducing the duty upon ad.
'enticements in Ireland, and compelling the newspapers in return
to insert the proclamations gratis. At present it was clear that
those papers which had the greatest circulation. had the least share
of proclamations. In this country the advertisement duty was so
heavy, that it operated injuriously to the newspapers. In the
United States of America, on the contrary, the papers flourished,
because the adrerthienient duty was so very reasonable.
Mr. GOULBURN maid he had but few oh riots to offer in
reply. Well as he woe accustomed to the usual habits of the Hon.
Member for Montrose, he never recollected an instance in which he
h cd dealt so unfaiily by the (louse as he had in the observations he
had just made How had lie proceeded? Ile had moved for
papers respecting the present year. and then drawn his arguments
from returns made in the year 11119, before he (Mr. Goulhurni was
in dike. He took the amount of stamps for the one year, and the
sums paid from the other, SO that the difference might mower
striking. Thus if a paper diminished in circulation since 1019, he
took the present circulation and the amount formerly paid, to
render the contrast the greater. Hut was that, he would ask, deal-
ing fairly with the House? ( Hear, hear.) The question for the
consideration of the (toilee was, whether it was convenient and
proper to Pictish those proclamations; and if so, whether it was
not done in the most suleisable manner. If the English method
were resorted to, as had been recommended by the lion. Gentle.
man, the vote could not be less than 9,11001. The practice in
England was to give 501. with every proclamation, and in this way
it would come to the !WWI he had stated, while the stint asked for
was only 6000 L, 20001. of which was for the expense of the Gazette,
so that in fact 4000/. only was for the publication of proclamations.
This, he thought, was a sufficient proof that there was.no inatten-
tion to economy on the part of the !Ash Government. 1 Hear, hear.)
With respect to the newspapers themselves, he expressed himself
incompetent to enter into their petty disputes ; and if the Hon.
Member for Montrose Mullets many troublesome matters to attend
Ito as as aited him I Mr. Goalburn) upon the other side of the water,
be would find something better to occupy his time than to waste it
In Inquiring into such petty transactions. What object. he would
Mk, could the Government have in bribing those papers? Fnr his
own part, he could safely aver that no person got less by bribing
the press than he did. for it had at all times dealt rather hardly
with him. t Hear, hear.) tie was not only ignorant of the politics
' of those papas, but even of the prytts theim eery few of

THE BRITISH PRESS.

which he had ever even. As to whet had been said bj the ITon..
Gentleman about paying this money through the hands of Mem-
bers of Parliament, it was really a strange misrepresentation. The
paper was the Carrick Post, and the Member of Parliament was
Sir Robert Shaw, a banker in Dublin, to whom, In the way of
business, the proprietor hativritten to receive the ntoney upon ac-
count. (Hear, hear.) He could assure the lion. Member that he
was liable to be deceived in the quarters from whence he derived
his information, for but little rehamee was to be placed on those
animaters who betrayed thtir trust and violated their duty, by die-
closing that whith they were bound maims kept secret. ( Hear,
bear, hear.) He should be extremelpsamutious, when he derived
his information front such a source, of making sweeping attacks of
bribery and corruption. (Cheers.)
Mr. ELLIS said that the advertisements from the office of the
Masters in Chancery were published in parttcular papers, not by
any order of his, but by a consultation between four Masters, who
selected those papers which were then in the greatest circucation.
' Sentedars's News Letter was one of those papers ; it circulated
3011,000 per annum, and had no politics of any kind whatever.
(Herr, hear.) He could also explain sway satisfactorily to the
Douse (tor he feared no lexplanation would be satisfactory to the
Mon. (lentlenian) the insinuation as to the Wide-Street Board-
That Hon. Gentleman had stated that there was some undctstand.
Mg or contract by which the Board were to supply the deficiencies
of the reduction in the proclamations. Some years age he had been
one of the Commissioners, and be could assure the House that no
such contract or understanding hat ever existed. (Hear, hear.) So
that it was prettt clear that his informers had not only deceived
him, but deceived him wilfully, and under these circumstances he
might form some estimate as to the degree of credit which he could
place in their Tuture Information.
Mr. HUM E said that he drew his information from documents
upon the table of the House, and not from private sources.
The gallery was then cleared fora div'sion.
The numbers were toe thereseltition.—
Ayes - - . 401 Nom . 18
Majority in favour of she Reeolatirea 22
CRIMINAL JUSTICE BIEL.
On the motion of fur. PEEL, the House resolved Itself Into a
Committee on the Criminal Justke Bill.
On the motion that the report be brought up, a conversation
took place upon the propriety of extending the punishment of
death in certain cases of theft to accessories after the fact.

Mr. PEEL said he wa4 prepared to go through with the present
Bill; but as many complaints had been made of the injury which
pmper:y under the existing state of law was subject to, he would,
next Session of Parliament, introduce a Bill to consolidate the en.
tire law as regarded the violation or private property.
After a kw words from Messrs. BROUGHAM and DEN.
MAN, the report was brought up, ordered to be printed, and the
further considr -.don of the Bill uponed to Tuesday next.

wan wu post, u a ueaday
BANK CHARTER AMENDMENT 1111,1,.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCII EQUER
the House resolved itself into a Committee on the Bank Charter
Amendment Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
several verbal amendments to make in the Bill under consideration,
for the purpose of preventing as effectually as possible any of the
new Bank Companies from making their notes, under a certain
amount. payable in London.
The first clause of the Bill having been read,after some desultory
conversation.

31r..11 HIGHT said he thought it would he politic to postpone
the further consideration of the Bill till Monday or Tuetulay next,
in order that an endeavour might be made to induce the Bank to
make some further concessions.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Bank
had been frequently applied to on this subject. but had an frequently
declined making the concession required. In his opinion there
would be no advantage gained by pursuing the course proposed
by the Honourable Member, and therefore he must decline adopt-
ing it.
This clause was then agreed to, as were also the other clauses of
the Bill.

......
The Bill was brought up with the amendments, and the report
was ordered to he received on Tuesday next.
CHURCH RATES (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion of Mr. GOULBURN, that the House resolve
itself into a Committee on the Church Rates (Ireland) Bill,
Mr. S. RICE rose, and after a few observations. moved that
" Instructions be given to the Committee on the Church Rates
(Ireland) Bill, to introduce the clause, empowering the Protestant
parishioners to assess the respective parishes for assisting towards
the building, enlargement, and repairs of Presbyterian mteting.
houses and Roman Catholic chapels."
The motion having been put,
Mr. GOITLBURN said that he should not detain the House
long with the objections to which he thought the motion was
open. He did not like that distinctions should be made between
the Protestant churches. the Roman Catholic chapels, and the
Presbyterian meedng.houseti. Nothing was indeed more im-
portant than any interference with the Established Church. He
was aware that the practices of vestries in Ireland was such, that
great evils resulted to the parishioner' from their abuses, and for
the purpose of correcting those mischievous effects, he had been in.
duced to bring forward the Bill which he introduced on the cub.
ject. But hie object in so doing was not to introduce • new law,
but to check the exercise of those indiscretion. which had led to the
abuses of the law which was in existence. Before the introduction
of that Bill, the compulsory assessments were illegal, and by
its operation so they would continue. If instead of the clause, it
had been proposed that the Boman Catholic chapels and Presby-
terian meeting-houses should be inserted after the words Estab-
lished Church. it would not be so objectionable. The clause, how-
ever, was of such a tendency, that it would place some of the Pro-
testant parishioners in opposition to others. Many might be
induced on such occasions to act so as to cultivate popularity
at the expense of those who suffered by the result, and were un-
willing to merit. These differences caused great animosities, and•
excited serious disputes. There would also be a serious awkwardness
when the consideration of the Roman Catholic chapels and of the
churches of the Established religion went under :he notice of the
vestry. With respect to the latter, the assessment was compul-
sory, though there might be an appeal; but in regard to the Ro-
man Catholic chapels and the Presbyterian meeting-houses this
ease was different, for the assessment was in some sense voluntary.
Another point was the indistinct :moire of the clause; for if there
was a power given to repair the Roman Catholic chapels, it might
he asked why not extend the principle and pay the parish priest.
Other Protestant parishioners might be more inclined towards the
Bible societies, and think that they were a fair subject for assess.
mews. It was, therefore, wrong to glee power to the majesty of
the vestry to dispose of the money of the minority who might feel
averse to that mode of distribution. He did not think It would be
objectionable in some few parishes, perhaps forty or fifty, to allow
them legally to act in the manner that he had been accustomed to
to do, withoet the licence of law, but there were other parishes where
such a system would be pernicious, because the Protestants and
Roman Catholic inhabitants were not on the amicable terms which
would justify such a proceeding. But if it was right that the re-
pairs of the Roman Catholic chapels alai Presbyterian meeting-
houses should form d ground of assessment, the practice ought, in
his opinion, be made compulsory, anti not left to the discretion or
indiscretion of a vestry. He thought that the principle of the
clause terded to produce great discontent, whereas the Bill which
he introduced did not contemplate any alteration in the law which
existed on the subject. He knew several instances where the prac.
tire which the clause recommended, was considered a grievous
affliction by the parishioners. Ile confest he did not perceive any
benefit which would result from its inserton in the Bill, and should
therefore oppose the motion.
Sir J. NEWPORT said that he wished to call the attention of
the House to the singular state of Ireland. England presented a
sulking contrast of liberality to the illiberality of Catholic Hun-
gary, but it was necessary that in Irdland` a change of the nature
recommended by the clause should be legalized. Presbyterians
and other sectarians were subject to pay fur the repairs of cathe.
dram, when such expenses should be paid out of the funds of such
an enormously wealthy establishment as that in Ireland. That the
practice which formed the object of the claw* was prevalent in
Leland lie was well convinced. He knew that it occurred in the
Comte( Clogher, and in the yew parish of Clogher, during three
successive ..ears. The Right lion. Baronet then read returns
front assessments of that pariah, whereby it appeared that in the
first year the sum of 3201. had been voted for the repairs of the
cathedral, )01. jot; the li.ounto Catholic Chapel, at A/. for the
Presbyterian Meeting House. This course had been pursued for
the three years uninterruptedly, and fully proved, net only that
the custom existed, but as there was no opposition to the
proceedings, it was to be irferreil that the mode was so
general, as not to be deemed objectionable. Catholics and
Presbyterians were excluded from vestries, which was a
grass injustice. It might be admitted to be a grievance of
genic magnitude, when it was considered that pariah vestries voted
large sums of money for stores, organs, and various Hearn-moda-
lities for the rich Protestant incumbents. Lately the parish of
Drogheda voted a considerable sum of monies for the erection of
houses for the pariah clerk and sexton. All these charges were
paid by the Catholic inhabitants, and yet it was atdd to be too much
ro ask those who taxed the Catholics, to contribute yo build chapels
fur the poor of that persuasion.
Sir R. INGLIS made some observations in a low tone, the im-
port of which did not reach the gallery.
Mr. Secretary PEEL thought tbatit would ben great advantage
to snake the charges tbr the support of the Church definite. The
Protestant inhabitants ought not to be allowed to charge indefi.
nutty. The extravagant charges for organs and building houses
alluded to by the Right lion. Baronet (Sir J. Newport) were cer-
tainly gross abuses, and oughi to be prevented by the Bill. A lit.
the parliament was constitisted by these vestries :n every parish, but
they should not be entrusted with unlftnited power. If the poor
rates were to be levied in Irelaed, fist was a question which should
be fairly considered by Parliament. It ought not to be left to the
parishes, however, to decide upon its propriety. If the system of
poor rates was to be established, an establishment which he much
I deprecated. (hear, hear), let it not conic by degrees, but by the
voice of Parliament. The great objection to the lion. Gentleman's
motion was, that it gave Protestants power to vote away the
parish Money for undefined purposes. (Hear, hear.) Another
objection was, that it was saying there should be no preference
given to the Established Church, which was a doctrine iiironsie-
tent with its maintenance. There was another point in which the
Hon. Gentleman's motion was objectionable. Only Catholics and
Presbyterians were to derive advantage from it; tither sects, as
Quakers and oilier Protestant dissenters, were excepted from any
benefit. 'Theme dissenters, therefore, would have good reason to
complain, if a parochial power. independent of Parliament, could
oblige them to pay for the support of the Established Church, their
own Church, aril cne or more of the (lurches named in the lion.
Gentleman's motion. Were he ('sir. Peel) resident in Ireland, he
hould be glasl to contril.ute fur the erection of a Roman Catholic

Chapel for the use of his tenants, but he should very much object
if this contribution was compulsory. (Dear.) Upon considera-
tion, he thought that the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman would
produce any thing but unanimity. Debates, disputes, and aeitatinn
would be the consequence of such a law in every pariTh. For this
reason he opposed. the lion. Gentleman's motion, and also because
he objected to the indefinite authority it permitted to the minority
in parishes. It was also objectionable because it was inconsistent
with the maintenance of the Established Church.

Mr. W. S5l ITII thought that Honourable Gentleman must
perceive that all the difficulties which arrested their course aeon out
of the anomalous state of the Church Estab!ishment in Ireland. A
minority had imposed this Establishment upon the majority against
their feelings, and that majority was called upon to submit to all
manner of abuses. because Protestant England had conquered that
country and established a Church there.
Mr. R. MARTIN said that the ohjeceion of his Right Honour-
able
Friend the Secretary of State (Mr. Peel) to the motion of his
Honourable Friend was, that it gave an indefinite power to parishes
in voting away money: now this objection might be obviated, if his
Honourahle Friend (Mr. S. Ric.) won't' consent to insert a pro.
vision, that the charge per acre should not exceed a certain amount.
Mr. TRAN f said he did not consider the question in reference
to Ireland as a separate country, but as a part of the empire. Look-
ing at it in this point of view. he could not agree to the latitudi-
narianism of principle which the motion wail calculated to en-
courage.
Dlr. S. RICE briefly molted.
After which the House divided, and the numbers wets—
For the Motion - 25 I Against it - -60
Majority - - 36
Upon the readmission of strangers into the gallery, we found
the House in Committee on the Church Rates ( Ireland) Rill, and
Sir .1. NEWPORT on his legs. The Honourable Baronet was
calling the attention of the House to the sth sec. 4th Geo. IV.
cap. 66, which gave a power to the Archbishop,' and Bishops of
compelling the inhabitants of a parish, in which there was no Pro-
testant church, to contribute to the repairs of that in the adjoining
parish, upon being allowed to resort to such church. This was in
many instances a haMship upon the inhabitants of the parish which
had no church, because it often happened that where there teas no
Protestant Church. the inhabitants were, the greater part of ,them
at least, if not all. Catholics. He should therefore move that there
be added to the clause then underdiscusainn the following words:—
" And also so much of the said Act (of 4th of his present Ma-
jesty) as permitted the Archbishops or Bishops of the diocese to
au.horise the parishioners of any pariah having no church, to use
the church of the adjoining, and to contribute to the repairs
thereof."

Mt. OOULBURN was glad to have the opportunity afforded
him of exculpating himself from the charge which had always
been made against him, of having originated this power, which
Was so objectionable to the Right Hon. Baronet. The clause in
the 4th Act of his present Majesty war not a new one, neither wet
it an Irish provision, but was taken from the 4th of 111.
where the same provision was inserted with regard to the union of
parishes in this country. The object of this clause was obvious:
It was not only to relieve the adjoining parish of a pori ion of the
expense of repairing their own church, which was used by inhabi-
tants of another parish ; but it saved the latter from being compel-
led to build a new church in their own parish. The case supposed
by the Right lion. Baronet of the parish without a church Moog
entirely Catholic would admit of being reversed; and it might
happen that the parish which had a church was inhabited by Ca-
tholics, and that the inhabitants of the adjoining parish were Pro-
testants, would it not in this case be to the advantage of both pa-
rishes that they should be united ? But these were both hypothe-
tical cases, neither of which were likely to happen. The principle
was simply this, were those who use the church of an adjoining
parish to be exempted from contributing to in repairs or not ?
thought it would be unreasonable to say that they ought, and
therefore he should object to the motion.

Mr. SPRING RICE spoke in favour of the motion.
Mr. Secretary Pk;El, said if there was a parish without a church,
the Bishop had a strict legal right to require a church to be built
by the parishiontra. If then that were the case, there might be
two adjoining polishes, one with a church and the other without,
and yet the Protestant inhabitants of both not so numerous as to
require two churches. Would not the argument of the possibility
of abuse apply as forcibly, if the Ilishnp were unnecessarily to
require the parish without a church to build one fur its own accom-
modation, when it was in his power to save it that expense by per-
mitting it to use the church of the adjoining parish, upon condition
of contributing only to its repairs ?
Mr. S. RICE said if the fact 89 stated by the Right Flonnurable
Gentleman were as he stated it, that the Bishop had the power to
direct the building of a church where there was not any, then there
would be an end of the question, because no one could object to the
exercise of this lesser power, which the Act of the 4th of his present
Majesty gave to him. But, in point of fact, the Bishop had no
more power to compel the inhabitants of a parish to build a church.
than the Grand Jury of one county had to compel the inhabitants of
the adjoining county to make a new road. lie was sure no such
law existed. It might be possible that, by an application being
made to the Board of First Fruits, such an order might be issued ;
but it was unlikely ; and the Bishop himself possessed no such
power.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT said that the Right Hon. Secretary
for Ireland had called his (Sir J. Newport's) case an hypothetical
one. Now it so happened that lie spoke, not hypothetically, • but
from a positive fact, where the parish which, being without a
church, had been connected with the adjoining parish. was with.
out a single Protestant inhabitant except the police stationed there;
and the church to which they were thus empowered to resort, was
live miles from the parish. Under these circumstances he contend.
ed the power was most preposterous, and ought not to exist in any
country. The hierarchy of Ireland had neglected to have the
church kept in repair for the last hundred and fifty years, and now
that they were all tumbled down, they saddled the Catholic popu-
lation with the expense of rebuilding them.
Mr. Secretary PEEL explained. He had not intended by the
observation he made to say that the Bishop had the power to com-
pel a parish to build a new church ; he rather meant to ask the
question than to state it as a fact of his own knowledge. But the
Bishop clearly had a right to compel the repair of a decayed chprch,
which in many instances would be morconernus on the parish than
to contribute to the repairs of the church of the adjoining parish.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT stated that he knew of two churches
within the diocese wherein he resided being out of repair, where
application had been made to the Bishop to compel their repair,
but without effect. and they were suffered to se to ruin. The con.
sequence was that there was not one church within twenty miles of
his residence, to which a Protestant could resort.

Mr. GOULBURN, in allusion to an observation from the Right
lion. Bart. but which was inaudible. observed that it would appear
whenever the returns should be made to Parliament, that the du.
ties of the clergy in Ireland were discharged throughout, and tha
under peculiar difficulties, in.• manner highly meritorious. (Hear
hear.)
After a few words from Mr. LESLIE. FOSTER and Mr. TRANT,
the motion was put and negutived without a division.
GRATIAN proposed the insertion of a clause to authorize
parishes in Ireland to assess taxes for the benefit of the poor.
Mr. BROGDEN did not think the clause could be entertained
by the Committee without special instructions from the House.
After a few observations by 3lr. Croker and Sir Robert Heron,

Mr..IOIIN SIIITII exprea sed a wish to have the clause re-
served for a future day, when there might be an opportunity for a
full discussion. _ . .

The cidu.e was then withdrawn, and the other clauses having
been egret .1 to, the House resumed, and the report WAS ordered to
be brought up on Tuesday.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House
adjourned at a (!GARTER PAST ONE O'CLOCK.

MINORITY
Who voted on Mr. flume's Motion against the Grant of 6,0001'. for
Proclamations In [rebind.

Althorpe, Lord Hamilton, Lord A. Parnell, Sir H. Lockhart, J. J.
Brougham, H. Howard, Henry Phillips, G. jun. Polito. W.
Dark-4, Colonel JerVol.lt, J. C. Rice, T. 8. TMLIERII.
Denman, Thomas Martin, John nsnitly.lohn Hume, Joseph
Grattan, Jamey Newport, Str J. Tavistock, Sian. Houck, J. B.

TO THR WORTHY AND INDEPENDENT MY4RY
OF LONDON.

OEYTLIIIIM
come-quenee of the numerous and earnest solicitations
A with which f have been honoured, and the }resolutions passed
on the 17th :tlarch, by a large and respectable Meeting of the 1. i.
very, I have been induced to otter myself a Candidate to be one
or your Representatives in Parliament at the ensuing Ueneral
Election.

Ina firm and unbending attachment to the great principles of
our invaluable Constitution, I yield to none. In the application of
those principles, I have always considered it essential to the sound
and permanent prosperity of the country that each branch of
the Legislature should exercise its own proper influence, free and
unshackled by the other. And therefore it is, that, while loyal to
the King, I have been always most anxious that the [louse of
Commons should be a fair and free representation of the people of
England.
Of the independence inseparable from the character of an honest
representative of the people of this great and tree country, no man
can have a deeper conviction than myself; and, while I *ha" •ry
greatly prize the high honour of representing the City of
in Parliament, should that important trust be committed to me, I
shall earnestly endeavour to merit the distinction by an anxious
and unremitting attention to its commercial, manufacturing, and
shipping interests—by the most watchful guardianship of its corpo-
rate rights—by a diligent and constant attendance on my public
duties—and by an unceasing entleavoitr to promote the collective
and individual welfare of my fellow-citizens.
Having already avowed these sentiments in a letter which I had
the honour of addressing to the Livery generally, on the 17th of
March. 1 had no intention of trespassing further upon them at the
present moment; but. as I find that more active exertion• are mak-
ipg by other Candidates, I am apprehensive that I might bethought
wanting in respect to those Gentlemen of the Lively with whom I
have not had the honour of any personal communication, were I
longer to delay my application to each for the favour of his Jodi-
vid nal suffrage.
Whenever the proper time shall arrive, I shall consider It my
duty to solicit, in person, from every Liveryman the honour of his
Ruppvtt ; and in the mean time, recommending myself to your
favourable consideration, I have the honour to be, with every senti-
ment of respect And esteem,
Your fatthful and obedient servant,
WILLIAM VENABLES.
Mansion House, April 12.

PRICER OF BRITISH
/kat Stock 201 202
per Cent. Red. 7SI
1 per Cent. Coo.. 714 1 a
Dato Acct.
ii per Cent. Mk tad
3$ pee Cent. Red. Rif
g,‘• 4 per Cent. 9.$ $ 4 iti 951

MOCKS YESTERDAY
Long Ann. Hit 3.16 •
India Stork 226 227
Ditto Bond, 6 7 pm
Ex. Bltls 10001. 10 11 pa
Ditto 6001.1 t II pin
Ditto Smell 10 11 pul
Lottery Tickets 21(.119.

PRICES 010 FOREIGN
Brea%lan Bonds
Ditto Acrt.
Milan Bonds 41
Colombian Bond, 42/
Ditto Bonds (11114) 4(12 112 11 2
Ditto Acct. 4I #1 26 I# 2lt #2t
4 /
Ibmieh Bonds (IRS) 564
Ditto Acct. 56,1
French Bente% 3 per Cent. Gsf. 50c.
lizatiange 24f. 65c. 50c.
Greek Bonds
Ditto Bonds (MO) 15 14 I

STOCKS YESTEi
Cuatituala Bonds
Mexican ButirlN 66
Dlttn Bonds '1826) 631 /3 11 s
Ditto Acct. 63 1 3 34 1 -
Peruvia
830 In Bonds 21i 30
Ditto Acct. 30

Portuguese Bonds 72/
Prussian Ponds 1114
Russian Bonds 77;
Ditto Acct. 77t 9 't
Spanish Bonds 74 9
Ditto Bond* (182 S:

COURSE UP F.XCII.
Amsterdam C.F. 12 10
I)Itto at sight
Rotterdam SU. 12 11
A nt•uerp
Hainhurgb ft U. 37 11
Altotia 4 U. 38 0
Paris, 3 days' sight a me
Ditto 2 U. 28 10
Bordeaux
Berlin
Frankfort on Mains Es. M . 138*
Petershurgh, rble 3 Us. rir)
Vienna, effective I '2 M. 10 29
Trieste ....d0.... ....... ... 10 28
Madrid
Cadiz
Babes l5l
Barcelona 33
'DM,
flbraltee . ...... ... .....

INGE YESTERDAY,.
Leghorn ...................
Genoa..... ....... .
........ 41
Venice ................
Malta
Palermo
Lisbon

Per e 5.114
..
........ .. .
1 .
160 t

Oporto ...........
Rio Jamb° ......
Bahia ........ . ...
.
Rococo Ayres .....
Iftblin, 21 dap' alibi
Cork

....... • •• •
i1114.1111a. Pia os.

portage! Geld, la eels
.. 4. a. &
pomp' Gold, la bus. •• 17
New Dooblooos ..... ..• 0 0 0
New Dollars . ...... •• 0 0 0
Silver, In bars. Woodard.. 0 4 Ile