The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-24 00:00:00

relieve them and liberate them. The principle of the
clause had been already sanctioned in the case of the
ccal-h eavers.

Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said a monopoly
was a sole ami exclusive right of disposing of a commo-
dity, and this clause would give the Trinity House the
exclusive power of getting ballast.

The Biihop of OXFORD said the clause would allow
the shipowners to get the ballast as they pleased, and
would only interfere with a set of middlemen who inter-
posed between the shipownen and the ballast-heavers.
Lord STANLEY of ADDERLEY still denied the
soundness of the principle on which the clause was
frant ed.

The Bishop of LONDON supported the clause on
moral, social, and religious grounds, considerations which
he hope:l would weigh with their lordship. These bal-
last•heavers were in a state of social slavery, and merely
sought emancipation.
The Bishop of OXFORD then handed in the clause,
stating that it was not his intention to press it in that
stage of the bill.

The bill then went through committee.
RELIGIOUS WORSHIP BILL.

On the motion that this bill be read a third time,
The Bishop of OXFORD said he wished to make a few
observations personal to himself. The first time this bill
was discussed he (the Bishop of Oxford) stated that a
►neeting of the bench of bishops was held, at which meet-
ing the bill was unanimously condemned. In the debate
which subsequently took place his right rev. friend the
Bishop of London corrected an extremely malevolent and
slanderous statement which appeared in a newspaper
purporting to be of a religiouscharacter, and to the effect
that he (the Bishop of Oxford) had stated an entire false-
hood, as no such meeting as that to which he referred 13114
taken place at all. Even after the correction of his right
rev, friend this newspaper pertinaciously adhered to its
malevolent misrepresentation, and maintained the state-
ment that the entire thing was a fabrication on his part.
Now the meeting took place under the presidency of the
Archbishop of Canterbury, and the bill was nemine eon-
tradicente condemned. He should be unworthy of their
lordships' respect did he misrepresent even to a hair's
breadth any matter ; and he now took that further op-
portunity of setting himself right in reference to this ab-
surd and slanderous imputation. (Hear.)
The bill was read a third time and passed,
The Burials Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Dwelling-houses (Scotland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The Crime and Outrage (Ireland) Continuance Bill
was also read a third time and passed.
The Turnpike Acts Continuance Bill passed through
committee.

The West Indies Relief Loans Arrangement Bill also
passed through committee.
The Lunatic Asylums (Ireland) Bal was read a second
time. _ __

The Huddersfield Burial-ground Act Amendment Bill
was also read a second time.

THE EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.

Lord POLWARTH said he wished to know whether,
if the Government did not mean to introduce before the
close of the session a bill for continuing to the paro-
chial schoolmasters in Scotland the present amount of
their salaries, they would be prepared to support such a
measure if brought forward by some independent mem-
ber of Parliament

The Duke of ARGYLL said that if the Government
did not think it advisable to introduce such a measure,
he thought it could hardly be expected that they would
give to it their support if it should be brought forward
by some member of Parliament unconnected with them.
He quite agreed. with those who said it would be very
unfair to make the schoolmasters in Scotland suffer in
consequence of differences of opinion among members of
the Legislature on the subject of education? But the
Government did not consider it desirabl3 to bring forward
a continuance bill in that case during the present session,
mainly because they did not believe that it was really
wanted. The present salaries would be paid to the pa.
rochial schoolmasters in Scotland up to the next Parlia-
ment, and the next payment would not be due to them
until a period which would extend more than two
months and a half beyond the usual time of the re-
assembling of Parliament, so that a sufficient oppor-
tunity would be afforded of re-considering the subject.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH said that if the act were
not renewed in the present session the people of Scotland
would be put to the inconvenience of making prepara-
tions for an alteration of the law before Parliament could
re-assemble. He should take that opportunity of ex-
pressing his belief that the most determined opposition
would be offered to any attempt to destroy the parochial
school system in Scotland. But at the same time he
did not deny that a different kind of schools was neces-
sary in the large towns and populous districts.
The conversation then dropped, and their lordships
adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY.)

The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock.

The Lords' amendments to the following bills were
considered and agreed to :—Severn Valley Railway ;
Somerset Central Railway ; Torquay District Churches.
The following bills were read a second time :—Hadow's
Divorce ; Jones's Divorce ; Merton's College Estate ;
Sumner's Divorce.

NEW WRIT.

On the motion of Mr. HAYTER, a new writ was
ordered for Southwark, in the room of Sir W. Moles-
worth, appointed Secretary of State for the Colonies.

NUISANCES REMOVAL AMENDMENT BILL.

On the order of the day for the thin' reading of the
above bill, some discussion took place on proposed
amendments in various clauses that hal been postponed
in committee on the bill.