The Sun.
London, England, 1838-06-09 00:00:00

REDUCTION OF POSTAGE.

The Noble and Learned Lord then presentedpetitions from the
printers of Ivy-lane, City, George street, Tower Hill, the British An-
nuity Company, the General Annuity Company, the Nalional Life In-
surance Company, from Cupar Fife, Devonport, and several other
places, praying for a reduction of the rate of postage. Also,
petitions from several towns and villages in Scotland against the mono-
poly enjoyed by the King's printer of printing the Bible, and about six
petitions from Scotland, against any further endowment to the Church
of Scotland.

The Earl of HARBOROUGH presented a petition from Gallas-
borough, praying for Vote by Ballot.

NEGRO APPRENTICESHIP.
The Earl of GALLOWAY presented petitions from Birmingham,
Lincoln, Stafford, and places in Buckinghamshire, and Bedford, praying
for the immediate abolition of Negro slavery. He felt it his duty to say,
that he could not concur in their prayer, as -he thought immediate
emancipation would be injurious, as well to the Negroes themselves as to
the Planters.

The Marquis of SLIGO presented a great number of petitions from
Bristol, Pirmingham, and places in Kent and Yorkshire, praying for the
immediate abolition of Negro apprenticeship.
The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from the Clergy of the
Diocese of llaphoe, against the Irish Church Temporalities Bill.
The Marquis of SLIGO, in the absence of a Noble Friend of hie., pre.
sented about 30 petitions from Durham, Hounslow, Chepstow, Dray-ton,
Ebenezer Chapel Leeds, Wolverhampton, Nottingham, York, and other
places, praying for the immediate abolition of Negro apprenticeship.
Lord DENMAN presented petitions from Milton, near Graves.
end, a Baptist congregation in Somersetshire, Ilenley.on.Thames,
Warrington, Lincoln, the Wesleyans of Bewdley, the Society
of Friends Bristol, from Hexborough, Great Grimsby, the in.
habitants of the county of Durham, from Trowbridge, from Charing,
in Kent, and other places, for the immediate abolition of Negro ap-
prenticeship.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented petitions to the ,am°
effect from South Minis, Harborough, Oxford, and other places,
IRISH MAGISTRACY.
The Noble Marquis then begged to call the attention of the Noble
Viscount opposite to a circumstance which deeply aabcted the peace of
Ireland. He alluded to the new Commission of the Peace which was
about to be issued, and from which the names of 'ten clergymen and
fourteen gentlemen in the county of Down, making in all twenty-four
resident magistrates in that district, were about to be removed from
the Commission of the Peace. He would defer the question until
the Noble Lord (the Lord Chancellor for Ireland) was •in his
place, when he would again repeat it.—(Hear, hear.) He under-
stood that an objection was made to appointing clergymen, but if
such were not done in many districts it would be impossible to have the
business of the country carried on. If any representations had been
made to the Lord Lieutenant relative to these gentler:ien, he hoped there
would be no objection to their production. If a it'll explanation were
not given he would feel it his duty to call the attention of their Lord..
ships to the subject.
Viscount MELBOURNE said the Nob!e Lord was master of his own
time, and was open to take whatever course he pleased upon the subject,
and he doubted not that his Noble Friend (Lord Plunket) would bg able
to give him a satisfactory answer,
Lord MULGI(AVE said, perhaps it would be more convenient if any
further discussion upon the subject was postponed until his Noble Prien4
returned. from Ireland.
After a few words from the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, the con-
versation dropped.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE presented a petition from Tyrone
against the Irish Poor Law Bill, and about 40 petitions from various
places in England and Scotland, praying for the immediate abolition of
Negro apprenticeship.

CANADA.
Lord BROUGHAM begged to ask his Noble Friend (Lord Glenelg)
whether Martial Law was or had been at any time proclaimed in Lower
Canada ? By the two Canada Acts it was provided that the criminal
law in Canada should be the same as the criminal law in England.
They knew that in England there was the physical power in • the
Crown to proclaim martial-law, but it was an illegal act to do so in
time of peace, and would require a bill of indemnity. He pledged his
reputation as a lawyer to that fact. What then was the law under which
the proclamation had been made?
Lord GLENELG said martial.law had been proclaimed in Canada by
the authority of the Governor.
Lord GOSFORD said he had done so with the advice of the legal
authorities i i the Colony. It had been confined to one district, that of
Montrea I.
Lord BROUGHAM assured the Noble Lord (Gosford) that he was
not aware until that moment that it was in the Noble Lord's time the
proclamation of martial-law been made, or he would have asked the
question privately, in the first instance. He had, however, gut no an_
seer to his question, by what legal authority it had been done.
Lord GOSFORD assured the Noble and Learned Lord that the
pro
since was, with the exception of one small portion, in a state of tran-
quillity when he had left.

TITHE AFFRAY AT WATERFORD,
The Earl of MULGRAVE begged to state, in refe;kence to a subject
which had been alluded to by the Noble Earl (Wia.low) yesterday, that
the Government had received no further inform.ation relative to the tithe
affray that had taken place near Waterford.
The Earl of "WICKLOW thought It most disgraceful that such a
circumstance should have taken place. Why was the sub-sheriff
permitted to discharge the duty of high Sheriff, and to permit such an
assault to take place in the presence of the police and military ?
The Earl of MULGRAVE said the Government was not respon-
sible for the sub-Sheriff discharging the duty. There was no law to
compel the High Sheriff to do the duty himself, and the police and
military in attendance were under the controul of the Sub-Sheriff,
who acted as High Sheriff on that occasion.
The Duke of WELLINGTON thought the Noble Lord should have
prcvkled for the attendance of a magistrate on such occasions,
Earl MULGRAVE had done so whenever it was in his power.
Earl GLENGALL had received a letter that morning stating that the
serjeant of police was dead.

POOR LAW (IRELAND) BILL.

The House resolved itself into a Committee upon this Bill,
On clause 46,

Lord ELLENBOROUGH proposed that the guardians of the eleeto.
rah districts should apply to the Commissioners, and that the Commis-
sioners should then call a meeting of the rate-payers of the district, and
a majority in value should authorize the rate.
The clause, as amended, was then agreed to.
The clauses up to 54 were agreed to.
On clause 54,

. The Duke of WELLINGTON proposed the insertion of a clause re.
gulating the proportions that the respective electoral districts should pay
towards the maintenance of the workhouse.
The clause was agreed to.
The clauses up to 57 were agreed to.
The Earl of WICKLOW m•vcd as an amendment the insertion of
the words "such only as are sold."
Viscount BERESFORD said that, although the turf land was not
actually rented, the adjoining land was always charged with an increase
on account of it. All should, therefore, be charged.
After some further conversation the House divided.
For the amendment 9
Against it

Majority
Viscount BERESFORD then moved that the written clause ba
struck out.
The House divided—
For the motion
Against it

•; 6
Majority
The clause was then agreed to.

Lord ELLENBOBOUGII moved that words be inserted audio.
rising Commissioners to appoint fit and proper persons to make surveys.
Agreed to.
Clauses up to 68 agreed to.
Clause 69.
The Duke of WELLINGTON moved the total omission of the clause.
The Earl of WICKLOW supported the clause.
Lord MELBOURNE should not oppose the emission of the clause.
The reasons given by the Noble Earl opposite for its retention were not
to him at all satisfactory, But he should, on the bringing up of the
report, propose the substitution of a new clause, the purport of which
was to give a discretionary power to the Guardians in each union to de.
dare what class of persons were to be allowed to deduct the rate from
their rent,

Lord ELLENBCIROUGH had objections to the withdrawal of the
clause.
The Duke of WELLINGTON objected to the clause, as imposing
cJi the Guardians a very invidious duty.
The Earl of WICKLOW thought the substitute proposed by the
Noble Viscount would only throw clifficultiesiiii the way of the Guardians.
Lord FITZGERALD should vote for the omission of the clause.

The Earl-of HA.DDINGTON suggested to the Nob:e Duke to post.
peme the clause.
The Duke of WELLINGTON had no objection to a short post-
ponement.
'I he Marquis of CLANRICARDE objected to the postponement of
the clause.
The clause was then rejected without a division,
Clauses down to 112. inclusive,W ere then agreed to.
On clause 113 being put to the Committee,
Lord FITZGERALD brought forward the amendment of which he
hail given notice last night, making the residence of a Commissioner in
Dot lid discretionary, instead of compulsive.
Viscount MELBOURNE objected to it.
After a few words from Lord Fitzgerald in reply, from the Earl of
Wicklow, from the Duke of Wellington, and from Lord Elleuborough,
the amendment was agreed to.
The clause, as amended, was then ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 111 was agreed to with a verbal amendment ; as were also
clauses 115 (the interpretation clan s:.•) and 116.
Ti:eir Lordships then proceeded with the earlier clauses of the Bill,
wh chwwe postponed when the Bill first went into Committee.
Clauses 1 to 17 inclusive were agreed to.

On clause 18 being put,
The Duke of WELLINGTON moved the addition of words, pro-
viJins " that in making or altering electoral districts no town lands should
be divided."
The datum thus amended was then agreed to.
Clauses 19 to 38 were agreed to,
On clause 39, authorising

to use barracks as work-

houses.
The Earl of GLENGALL wished to say a few words on this clause.
The and on which the barracks were built had in most cases been given
at merely nominal rents, on the principle that the presence of a bar-
rack must prove advantageous. That inducement would not apply to
the workhouses, as very few would covet their neighbourhood. A neigh-
bour of his in Tipperary, Sir John Carden, was very uneasy on the sub.
feet, the snore especially as it was generally believed that in case of the
workhouse proving too small sheds were to be erected round it. This
would very soon make all the gentlemen of the country absentees.
The Duke of WELLINGTON did not think it honourable conduct in
Government to make use of these buildings as workhouses.
Viscount MELBOURNE observed that great attention was due to
the observation of the Noble Duke. The Noble Viscount then (as we
understood him) intimated an intention of making some alteration on the
bringing up of the report.
The clause was then agreed to.
The remaining clause (40) was then agreed to, and Tuesday fixed for
receiving the report.
The House adjourned at a Quarter to Twelve o'Clock.

110 USE OF COIII3IONS, JUNE 8.
The Speascza took the Chair at the usual hour.
GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY BILL.
On the motion of Lord F. EGERTON this Bill was read a third time
and passed.
NATIONAL LOAN FUND ASSURANCE COMPANY.
Mr. HALL brought up a Report from the Committee on the National
Loan Fund Assurance Company's Bill, requesting that the time for
rr s%ing thclr Report might be extended to the :oth of June; and
they did so in consequence of the understanding come to the
other night, that the second reading should then take place, but that
the Committee should not proceed until the President of the Board of
Trade had introduced his Bill.
The extension of time was granted.
MIDDLESEX COUNTY COURTS BILL.
Mr. CR A WFORD brought up a report from this Committee, request-
ing an extension of time.
Captain WOOD thought the Bill ought not to be proceeded_with.
The Bill had been brought in a late period of the Session, and had not
received the consideration it required. No ground had been stated for
asking the present extension of time, and he (Captain Wood) having
cpposed the application in Committee, would certainly now resist the
motion.

Mr. HALL supported the motion.
Mr. CRAWFORD had obtained the sanction of a Committee for
making the application. The Hon. Member for Middlesex had most
certainly been a party to it, although he had subsequently said he had a
great mind to oppose it.
Mr. AGLIONBY never knew an instance of any opposition
being given to an application of this kind, after it had
been placed in the hands of the Chairman. The Bill was one more
of a public than of a private nature, and lie was surprized at the oppo.
sition now brought forward. He trusted that, as this was a mere
matter of form, the House would accede to the motion.
Lord G. SOMERSET objected to the House granting an extension
of the time.
Lord DUNGA NNON Opposed the extension of the time.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided.
For the Motion 39
For the Amendment
Majority —2o
Mr. CHALMERS brought up the report of the Committee on the
Newtyle and Cupar.Angus Railway Bill.
Lord DUNGANNON presented a petition from the Corporation of
Durhane, and from a parish in the same county, praying for the abo-
lition of my° apprenticeship.
OXFORD AND GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.
On the motion that this Bill be read a third time,
Mr. MACLEAN said that though the House had divided upon the
Bill, on the bringing up of the Report, he still felt it his duty
to oppose its passing, as his constituents were deeidedly opposed
to it as well as nearly all the authorities of the University. They
had no other means whatever of meeting the demand, which, in
point of honour, as well as in point of law, the town of Oxford were
bound to discharge, except through the medium of these tolls.—
(Hear, hear.) It was quite fair to state, and he stated it for
consideration of her Majesty's Government, that he believed,
on other estates in the city of Oxford, the charitable money was
secured ; but there was no security whatever for the money borrowed
from the Exchequer, as he understood, except that rate, which in the
petition from the city of Oxford it was stated the railroad would in all
probability totally annihilate. That was not the only objection
the city of Oxford had to this railroad. They stated the
T9ad itself was not required either by the state of the traffic, or the
difficulty of the access to the Western road, for there was an
exceedingly good road, which would bring every body anxious to go by
the Wes ern Railway, to the spot, in about half an hour's more time '
than would be occupied if this railroad were carried into effect. So that
the gain would be only one single half hour, while the expense of making
the railroad must be enormous. Indeed it was doubtful whether it would
even pay the projectors, but that was their lookout and not his constituents.
It might be said why was not the Bill opposed in Committee. Last year
the Bill was opposed in Committee by the city of Oxford at great cx.
pence; and there was a very strong feeling both in the town and the
University against this Bill, upon grounds which had never been
refuted. The city of Oxford had erected for the benefit of the
inhabitants, at a very considerable expence, waterworks to supply
them with cheap and pure water. If this Bill passed, the object of that
work wotjd be defeated. Just to saves B
an hour in time, this
Bill was to i e passed, empowering the Company to take an acre of
ground for their warehouses, &c., and in a manner which might greatly
inconvenience the University ; for there was no provision what.
ever in the Bill to provide compensation.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
The result of the railway would be to tend to the ill-health of the
lower part of the town. He (Mr. M'Lean) therefore moved that the
Bill be read a third time this day siX months.
Mr. CRIPPS said he could not understand how this Bill should be
opposed.—(Hear.) There was not a reason which the Hon. Gentleman
had assigned that ought not to hare been disposed of in Committee.
Sir R. INGLIS said this was the work of certain speculators, and
quite unsupported by any individual either connected with Oxford or its
vieinity.—(Hear.) On that ground he should oppose this or any other
Bill .in similar circumstances.
ylr M. PHILLIPS said it appeared to him rather extraordinary that
a Bill 0): this nature should have been opposed in its present stage,
more especially after the division which took place last night, which
ought to have been decisive. From the connexion which he had had
with different populous places, this was the first time he had ever heard
of a large community like Oxford wishing to repudiate the advantages
confered on it without any taxation being imposed on them, and that
other parties had come forward to confer a blessing on them without
asking then' to find the money. He thought they were about to have
a great benefit conferred on them, and he did not think it right for this
House to stand between them and the consummation of this Bill.
Mr. ESTCGURT .said, with regard to the assertion made, that the
objection had not been taken before the Committee, he would state that
they were made, although the Committee did not appear to be suffi_
eiectly impressed with their importance.—(Hear, hear.) The. ob-
jections had been urged by his Hon. Friend near hilts and himself in
the strDngest manner. It was said that the press‘at was the first
instance ot a Railway Bill being impeded in its progress through the
House, when that Bill was to confer a great benefit. Why, that was the
very question before the House.--(Hear, hear.) He (Mr, Fateourt)
denied that it would confer any benefit. The University of Oxford
was opposed to the coestruction of the railway, on the ground
that it would occasion much greater inconvenience than it would confer
advantage—the Citizens of Oxford were also opposed to it, and he
would, therefore, say that it was not for the benefit of the city of Ox-
ford, but a job set on foot by a party of speculators and contractors,
.against the feelings and wishes of those most interested in the mat-
ter.— Cries of " Question.")
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided.
whet. the numbers were—
-79
For the third reading
Against it 26
Majority for the third reading
&el OWEN presented a petition from a number of the watermen
and lighten.ien of the Thames against the Steam.boat Navagation Bill.
Mr. CLAY" }resented a petition from certain watermen and lighter-
men against the Thames Steam-navigation Bill.
Sir G. CLERK presented a petition from Glasgow against the Scotch
Burgh Bill.
Lord ASHLEY moved that a message be sent to the Lords for a copy
of the minutes of evidence taken before the New Zealand Committee.
Mr. GRANBY presented a petition from several clergymen in Lei.
cester, in favour of the abolition of Pluralities.
Lard DUNGANNON gave notice that he should, on Tuesday next,
present a petition from Stockton-on-Tees, praying that ample endowment
might be gives to the University of Durham.
IRELAND—ATTACK UPON THE MILITARY.
In answer to Mr. Serjeant JACKSON,
Lord MORPETH said he believed the accounts in the papers, of a
riot, and an attack upon the military and police, were substantially
correct.
Mr. Serjeant JACKSON enquired if on that occasion the military
and police had been restrained from using their weapons to self-defence ?
Lord MORPETH replied that he had received no information
upon that point.

COUNTY COURTS' BILL.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL asked if the Nob:e Lord (Lord J. Russell),
intended in the course of the present session to proceed with this Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he was afraid he should not be able to do so.
But he would be enabled to give the Hon. Gentleman a more specific
intimation in the course of the next week.
LOWER CANADA.

Mr. LEADER said, Lord Gosford had declared martial.law in Lower
Canada without any authority from the Imperial Parliament. The law and
constitution of Lower Canada gave the Governor no power whatever to
declare martial law without the Consent of the provincial Legislature.
He wished to ask the law officer of the Crown if such a measure was
constitutional ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said there could be no doubt that when civil war
or rebellion took place, martial law against all persons with arms in their
hands, and in defiance of the Queen's authority, was justifiable. And
the declaration of martial law was but notice to the inhabitants.
Mr. LEADER said he did not dispute whether Lord Gosford's con-
duct, under the circUMstance, was justifiable, but whether it could
ha maintained in a court of law. Because, if a Governor took upon
himself the responsibility of a step, which was clearly against the law
and constitution, he must apply to Parliament for a Bill of Indemnity.
Now, as Lord Gosford had no legal authority to establish martial law,
it was absolutely necessary, in order to justify Lord Gosford, that there
Should be a bill of indemnity ; and be wished to ascertain whether the
Noble Lord meant to ask for a bill of Indemnity ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not see any neeessity at present for a
Bill of Indemnity, but if it was requisite, Government would ask for one.
As to whether the proclamation of Lord Gosford could be sustained in
a court of law, he trusted the Hon. Genttentad Would not think it a
proper question to put to him.
Mr. LEADER was promised that the Attorney-General should be
is
his place to answer it ; but it appeared that he was not. If there should
be no Bill of Indemnity, our boasted defence of tit* Hobo; Carpet was
of no use whatever.

FACTORY BILL.
Lord ASHLEY said the Bill for the regulation of factories had been

A long time before the House, and he now found it postponed to the tail
inst. He thought it now almost impossible that it- could be canted
through the House during the present Session, and he wished to know
the intentions of Government on the subject.
Lord J RUSSELL said the Bill had been delayed by the indisposition
of the Under-Secretary of State. Since the BR had been introduced
there were various parties pressing for alterations and changes in it,
and if it came on, a considerable time must be devoted to its discussion.
The course he meant to pursue was not to press the farther consideration
of the Bill during the present session.
BENEFICES PLURALITIES BILL.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL then moved the Order of the Day for the
further consideration of the Report on the Benefices Pluralities Bill.
Mr. HAWES moved as an amendment that the Bill should
be recemmittcd, for the purpose of striking out all those
clauses that were objectionable. Since the question had been
before the House a most important petition hall been presented,
which he considered justified the course he was now adopting.
The memorialists were of opinion that pluralities could be abolished
with great benefit to the Church, and they farther stated that they con-
sidered that the principle was against the true interests of the
Church. That memorial was signed by sixty-three clergymen,
and they stated that they were against the Noble Lord's Bill, because
there were no less than 3,000 livings within the limits prescribed by
this Bill. It was a mistaken notion, also, that it was poor clergymen who
enjoyed pluralities, because it was ascertained that of pluralists,
for every one who had heings to the amount of 2001. there were six
who enjoyed livings to the amount of 5001. At present every parish
had a Curate performing all the ecclesiastical duties of the parish
at a much smaller stipend than is enjoyed by those pluralists
The probability was, that the pluralities would continue to be nearly as
numerous hereafter as they were at the present moment. The point
he wished to press more particularly on the Noble Lord, was the consi.
deration of the arguments urged by the memorialists, who had addressed
the Archbishop of Canterbury on this subject; and when he considered
that the Bill of the Noble Lord would not put an end to pluralities, but
rather tend to increase them, he did consider that a good ground for
taking the course he had. Before he concluded he would venture to
read to the House an extract of a letter he had received from a Clergy-
man, and he had received many, expressing the same strong opinion :
He said the experience of twenty years convinced him that the amount
of nonresidents in the Church, and the misapplication of its revenues,
had greatly injured its usefulness. The number of benefices, without
resident incumbents would be between 3,500 and 4000, unless public
opinion prevented it, but how this was to act under the auspices of a
Bill sanctioned by Government and the House he was at a loss to know.
The division which he (Mr. Hawes) was about to take would show
who were the true friends of the Church.—(Hear, from the Tories.)
He repeated, this would be the fact. He had shown that in extremely
poor dioceses persons were found who discharged all the duties which
ought to be discharged—he had shown that clergyman had gone
out of their way to address the Archbishop of Canterbury to abolish
pluralities altogether, and therefore he was entitled to say that those
who maintained pluralities had no right to consider themselves as the
friend* of the Church. lie thought the policy of the Noble Lord with
regard to the Church partook of the same character that marked his
other measures. He seemed always afraid of doing either too much cm
too Uttle. In t his case, with the Bishops, the Church, and the spirit of the
times In his favour, he declined to effect one of the greatest reforms that
could be effected in the Church. He regretted the course which the
Noble Lord had taken on this occasion, and to take the sense of the
House on the amendment which he had moved, that the Bill be re.
committed.
Mr. CLAY seconded the amendment.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL understood ohe proposal of the lion. Member
to be, that the Bill should be re-committed, with the view of abolishing
pluralities altogether. This question had been discussed already,
and more particularly by the Honourable Sletnber;,for Kilkenny,
The Hon. Gentleman said, let there be no pluralities. Suppose a living
of 301., or even 40/. a year, and nobody should be found to fill it, the
necessary consequence would be, that it would be incumbent on the
Bishop to ask some neighbouring clergyman to do the duty, who might
have other duties to perform. However desirable it was to abolish plu-
ralities, unless the Hon. Member proposed such a modification of the
Clergy's incomes as would enable every clergyman to live upon his in-
come, his amendment would hardly benefit the Church.—(Bear, hear.)
Mr. HOPE said a few words which were nearly inaudible in the
gallery. We understood him to recommend some amendment, the
purport of which we could not catch.
Mr. PRIME thought, that although he objected to pluralities gene.
rally, th, re were cases in which they ought to be tolerated.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided—
When there appeared for the motion 145
For the a,nendment 34
Majority —lll
We understand that two Members found themselves amongst the
party opposed to that with which they intended to divide, which caused
a long discussion with closed doors. Eventually the two votes were
disallowed.
Mr. HUME objected to the course which was adopted. Several
clauses had been added to the Bill, which there was no opportunity of
discussing as fully as they could be discussed in Committee. By one of
these clauses a pluralist holding three, four, or five benefices could still
accept another.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the course he intended to pursue was to go
regularly through the Bill. He did this because the clauses ar.d amend-
ments were mixed up with each other.
The first clause was then agreed to.
On clause e being proposed,
Sr H. VERNEY moved as an amendment that in line 2'2, after the
word " diocese," the following words should be inserted :—" But such
two benefices shall not involve the cure of souls."
'1 he question being put the House divided, when there appeared—
For the original clause O6
For the amendment 42
Majority
The clause was then agreed to, as was also the third clause.
On the fourth clause being proposed,
Sir H. VERNEY moved as an amendment that the fourth and fifth
clauses be omitted, and the following substituted :—" And be it enacted
that no spiritual person holding any benefice involving the cure of souls,
shall accept, or take, or hold therewith any other benefice involving the
cure of souls, unless such benefices are situated contiguous to one ano-
ther, and the parish Churches are within three miles of each other, and
the united population of such two benefices do not exceed 3,000 souls,
and the united income of such two benefices amount to less than 1301.
per annum... The object of his amendment was to restrict the holding'
of two parishes to such a limit as would afford effectual spiritual super-
intendence.
Ms. HUME seconded the amendment. In his opinion there should
be no pluralities, and although he should vote for the amendment of his
Hon. Friend as the lesser evil, yet the course best calculated to serve
the cause of true religion, and consequently benefit the people, would be
to abolish pluralities altogether.
Mr. GOULBCIIN said that Hon. Members who were so anxious to
lessen those revenues should recollect that it was necessary to afford
Clergymen a sufficient inducement to perfect themselves not only in
that education which would pass current amongst their flocks, but that
ecclesiastical education which would tend to render them fitting, by'
teaching and example, to improve the moral condition of their flocks.
When Hon. Members objected to the Bill as not going far enough, they
should remember that it not only limited the Clergy with respect to re-
sidence, but also to population and revenue. It had been said by an
Hon. Member on the other side that Clergymen could be found to um.
dertake Curacies for a very small remuneration. This was a most fat.
lacious mode of reasoning ; for a young Clergyman, expecting future
preferment, would gladly take a Living, if it were worth no more than
five pounds, in order to place himself in the way of advancement. It was
idle to speak of the readiness of young men to take small stipends In
this respect the Church should be looked upon as no more than any other
profession, where the junior branches would avail themselves of small
remuneration, merely because the position which they attained placed
them on the way to advancement.
Mr. CHILDERS said they should endeavour to afford an induce-
ment to young gentlemen of talents and attainments to enter the Church
as a profession. Now he found that the pluralities were all in the hands
of persons possessing great influence—in fact, that those received the
advantages of pluralities who least required any assistance of that
that description. In one case there were five benefices held by an in-
dividual, and one of them was worth 1,0001. per annum. He objected
to the limits proposed by the Noble Lord, for, instead of putting an end
to pluralities, it went rathcr to sanction those existing at pres.ent within
the limit of ten miles.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the objection of Ilia Honourable
Friend, with regard to the limits which lie proposed, was answered very
easily, for the same objection would apply to any limitation, as well as
that of ten miles and I,oooe The Honourable Member had instanced
a case where five benefices were held by one individual, and yet when
he (Lord John Russell) proposed to remedy that state of things his
Honourable Friend objected to it. In truth none of those objections
applied, for the only difference between his (Lord John Russell's) pro-
posal and that contained in the amendment was one of degree, and,
feeling that his was best calculated to effect the purposes tor which the
Bill was introduced, he should oppose the amendment.
Mr. WYNN opposed the amendment.
Sir R. INGLIS opposed the amendment.
Mr. NICHOLL did not think the abuse originated with the Bishops,
but at all events the Bill would remedy the evil.
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR expressed his intention to support the
amendment.
Mr. BAINES was unfavourable to pluralities; he should vote for
fixing the amount at 7501. rather than 1,000/.
Mr. PLUMI'TRE would not object to a clergyman holding two bene-
fices where the income did not exceed 1,0001., but he, at the same time,
did not see how any clergyman could attend properly to two parishes,
containing each a population of 3,000 souls.
After some further conversation the House divided, and the numbers
were :

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

For the amendment 53
Against it
Majority for the clause —4
Mr. HUME said that on the third reading he would move that no
benefice should be held in plurality where there was a cure of souls ex.
eeeding 3,000.
The succeeding clauses, down to clause 11, were agreed to as
amended.
On clause 12, relating to the union and seporation of parishes, being
put,
Mr. GLADSTONE objected to the power which this clause gave to
the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and thought that such a power would
be best exercised as the law stood by the Queen in Council.
After a desultory conversation, in which several Hon. Gentlemen took
part, the clause was agreed to.
The clauses down to 21 were then agreed to, as amended.
The other clauses to clause 3-1 inclusive were agreed to.
On clause 35 being proposed,
Mr. FRESHFIELD moved as an amendment, " That a license fur
non-residence shall be granted in the case of any dangerous illness or in-
firmity of body of himself, his wife, or child, or any part of his family,
or in the case of incapacity of mind of such spiritual person."
Lord DUNGANNON opposed the amendment.
Mr, LAW supported the amendment, because nearly the same words
were to be found in clause 57.
Colonel SIBIiiORP also supported the amendment.
Lord J. RUSSELL had no doubt that the illness of soma members
of the family of a clergyman had been made the ground for a license of
non-residence even when two benefices were held by the same person,
and he should therefore oppose the amendment.
Sir E. SUGDEN would be sorry to be compelled to vote against the
amendment upon principle, but he did not think his Hon. Friend ought
to divide the House upon it.
Mr. HUME opposed the amendment.
Mr. FRESHFIELD again modified his amendment, and after a
short conversation the House was cleared for a division, but on the
suggestion of Mr. L3w the Hon. Gentleman withdrew his amendment,
reserving to himself the power of d;viding the House on the point if his
objection was not provided for on the third reading.
Clauses up to 76 inclusive were then agreed to.
On clause 77 being proposed,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that at the suggestion of some Members of
the Episcopal Bench he was induced to omit the clause.
The clause was accordingly omitted.
Clauses up to 84 were then disposed of,
Mr. WYNN proposed a proviso upon the 85th clause, to the effect
that in ease of any appointment in Wales of a spiritual person unable to
instruct in toe Welch language there should be granted a power of ap.
peal to the Archbishop ei C,;eterbury.
11(r, HUME said that she Rstaus,sherl Church did not deserve to
exist so iciskily fit could not furnish Clergymea to mach in the Welsh
language. %lamas r 44. it would be of no use to the majority ...: 7.1):.
Plis:lic•
iMr. W. Q. STANLEY said that the Bishops %cont:, be unalsle to
judge of this fact,
Loyd DUNGANNON said that in a case where he had the Prese4-
talon to a Wglsh living, although the Clergyman was well conyersaut

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 9, 183-R.

with Welsh, yet the Bishop would not make the appointment until he
had been thoroughly examined in Welsh. -
After scSase further.convenation the amendment was put, and nega-
tived wit'sout a division.
Clauses to 110 were then disposed of.
Upon the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, a clause was added,
exempting the three late Chaplains from the operation of the Bill.
Mr. NICHOLL moved a clause exempting from stamp duty all instru-
ments connected with the admission to benefices under the annual value
of 0001. of spiritual parsons not holding any other benefice or cathedral
preferment cf the annual value of 1501.
Lord J. RUSSELL objected to the clause.
The House divided--
For the motion
Against it
Majority —9
Col. SIBTIIORP then proposed a clause to the effect that the widow
of ally spiritual person holding a benefice, and having a residence at-
tached to it, should be entitled to remain in such residence for a period
of three months after his death.
After a few words from the ATTORNEY-GENERAL,
'The clause was, by consent, left in his hands for further amendment.
The Bill was then reported, and ordered to be read a third time oil
Friday next.
Lord J. RUSSELL then moved the adjournmi.nt of the House instil
Monday, stating at the same time that it was his intention to move that
the House should sit more than once on the Saturday in the time to
come, to forward the Bills before it in their several stages.

REGISTRATION OF ELECTORS.
The Registration of Parliamentary Electors' Bill then went through
Committee pro forma, some new clausqs were brought up, and the Bill
was ordered to be printed.
INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
On the motion of Mr. P. THOMSON, the International Copyright
Bill was committed pro forma.
After a few words from Mr. Wdrhurton, Mr. P. Thomson, Mr. Darby,
the Solicitor-General, and Sir R. Inglis, the Bill with the amendments
was ordered to be reported to the House, and printed.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House
adjourned at a Quarter to One o'Clock.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

In the course of the conversation which took place on
Thursday night in the House of Lords relative to the late
fatal riot near Canterbury, Lord Brougham said that the be-
lief of the peasantry in the absurd and ridiculous stories of
Courtenay was only to be accounted for by their gross igno-
rance ; and that he hoped, therefore, to have the support of
Lord Melbourne on his motion on the subject of education.
Is the noble and learned public instructor quite sure that he
is not confounding superstition with ignorance? Is he quite
sure that educated persons never believe absurd and ridiculous
stories? If we are not very much mistaken. the believe:s in
Irving's unknown tongues imposture had, and have still, many
educated persons among their number : and if we are not
greatly misinformed, many patrons of the Confusion of Use-
ful knowledge Society—colleagues of the Noble and
Learned Lori—are actually attempting at this moment
to humbug the public into a belief in the revolting absurdities
of animal magnetism! Not many months ago the Pope him-
self was exhibiting to the populace of Rome certain holy
relics, the sight of which was to cure the cholera ; and the
most absurd and ridiculous stories of the Saints are still cre-
dited, by thousands of educated Members of the Church over
which his Holiness presides. If the few deluded followers
of the maniac Courtenay be 25 uneducated as Loid Brougham
rqr-cents them to be, they have an excuse which cannot be
put forward in favour of the other fanatics to whom we have
alluded. It is said that the former believed that Courtenay
brought down stars from heaven when he was merely practis-
ing a pyrotechnic trick : it is known that members of the So-
ciety fur the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge have perfect faith
in the miracles which the animal magnetizers profess to work.
It is clear, therefore, that what Lord Brougham prescribes is
not a specific for the disease at which he, in common with
most sane men, is so much shocked, and which all friends of
their country and their kind must desire to sae eradicated.
Times.
We earnestly recommend to the notice and favour of the
public a Bill laid on the table of the House of Lords by Lord
W)nford, a copy of which appears in another part of our
paper. It will be for the honour of Parliament and for the
advantage of the community that this Bill, or the substance of
it, should speedily become law. It is difficult to imagine, in-
deed, that any considerable number of Members in either
House of Parliament will venture to oppose a measure so rea-
sonable and equitable as that which ordains that men who
either cannot or will not pay their lawful debts shall no longer
be deemed fit for the highest and most important of all public
trusts. The boasting and hollow Reformers of our day may
be estimated at their just value when it is seen that they leave
to a Nobleman, s‘h ) cannot be accused of any alliance with
them, this honourable effort to divest of the functions of a le-
gislator every man against whom it stands indelibly recorded
in the rolls of our Cout is of practice that he is alieni appetens
sui profusus. But it has been thus in all ages. Cataliae
himself was a long-tongued Reformer.—Morning Post.

PAYMENT OF DEBTS BY PEERS AND MEMBERS.

On Thursday night the following Bill, presented by Lord Wynford,
was laid on the table of the House of Lord,. It is entitled " A Bill
to prevent the payment of just debts beini, defeated or delayed by the
privilege of Parliament." The preamble sets forth, " Whereas it is
derogatory to the honour and dignity of the Peerage and of Parliament
that the privilege of freedom from imprisonment, which was given to
Peers and Members of Parlian ent to protect them from being molested
by their fellow-subjects, or oppressed by the Crown, by arresting and
detaining them in custody upon claims for debts not due, should be used
to prevent or delay the recovery of debts the justice of which has been
established by the judgment or decr-e of one of the superior Courts of
law or equity ; be it enacted,•• Scc.:— •
1. That no Member of ether House of ..Parliament shall vote or sit
in the House of which he is a Member, or have any privilege of Peerage
or of Parliament, from the expiration of one week after he has been
served with notice that a decree or order for the payment of money to
any person or persons has been made against him by the Courts
•f Chancery or Exchequer in England or Ireland, or that
judgment for any debt or damages in the Cowls of Queen's
Bench, Common Pleas, or Exchequer of England or Ire-
land, or a decree of the Court of Sessicn in Scotland, for
any debt or damages, has been signed or matle'against him; and that no
such Member of either House of P4rliament shall sit or vote in Parlia.
went, or avail himse!f of the privilege of freedom from imprisonment,
or any other privilege of Peerage or of Parliament, until such decree,
order, or judgment shall be satisfied, reversed, or proceedings in it stayed
or suspended; provided always that no execution or other proceeding
against the person of any Member of the House of Commons or Lords
shall be issued upon any judgment in an action on a bond or covenant
forming part of the security for money lent on mortgage, until the inte.
rest due on such mortgage has remained unpaid fot
montivt, or the
principal SUM, or any part of it, for more than one year after paYine,it of

e -
the same shall have been demanded by the mortgagee.
'2. That if any such decree, order, or judgment shall remain in force
more than one month against ally Member of the House of Commons,
the seat of such Member shall be void, and on notice being served on
the Speaker of the House of Commons that proceeding: to enforce any
such decree, order, or judgment have been issued and in force against
any Member of the House of Commons for more than one month, a writ
may be issued for the election of a new Member in the place
of tile Mem_
ber against whom such proceedings as aforesaid have been taken.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, JUNE S•