The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-26 00:00:00

[PRICE SD.

interfere with the principle of local self-government, and
he would therefore vote against the amendment.
The Bishop of ST. DAVIDS observed that the
amendment, being one of compromise, rendered it im-
possible to discuss the question upon any ground of prin-
ciple whatever. The real question lay, however, in a
very narrow compass. If their lordships were prepared
to affirm that whenever property was once assigned for
the maintenance of religion it could never be diverted
from that purpose without sacrilege, then they were
bound to deny the demand of the Canadian Legislature;
but to lay down such a principle would be strangely to
forget the history of this measure itself. The assump-
tion that this bill involved a breach of faith was erro-
neous, as might be shown from a reference to official
documents, written when the act of 1840 was agreed to.
The Bishop of LONDON would not consent, in com-
pliance with the wishes of a small portion of her Ma-
jesty's subjects, to sacrifice a Church which was the
dearest and most valuable inheritance of the colony.
The Duke of ARGYLL felt himself unable to agree
with the amendment, which was virtually subversive of
the great principles already assented to in the second
reading of the bill--namely, that it was the natural
right of every colony to exercise exclusive control over
all matters of purely internal concern.
Earl GREY considered that the interests of the
Church, as well as the political interests of the empire,
called upon their lordships to pass this bill in the shape
in which it had been introduced. If their lordships were
determined to reject it, he appealed to them to do min
a plain and straightforward manner by a vote upon the
third reading, and not to concur in an amendment which
had no principle to stand upon.
Lord ST. LEONARDS said the question was whether
they were to destroy existing endowments. The act of
1840 was passed as an act of peace and justice, and it
did surprise him that the members of the same Govern-
ment who introduced that measure should. now come
forward and ask the Legislature to undo all that had
been done. _

Mr. WILSON said the Postmaster-General wouli be
quite ready to consider the case of the sorters.
SOAP DUTIES.

In reply to an Hon. MEMBER,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was proposed to abolish the duty on the importation of
manufactured soap, but not the duty on the raw mate-
rial.
METROPOLITAN BUILDING ACT.

In reply to Lord D. STUART,
Sir W. MOLESWORTH said it was not intended to
introduce any bill this session to amend the Metropoli-
tan Building Act, but an inquiry would be instituted
this year with the view to legislation next session.
THE MODERN GUNPOWDER PLOT.

In reply to M. T. DTJNCOMBE,r
Lord PALMERSTON said he had been misinformed
with respect to the gunpowder found at Rotherhithe.
He stated on a former occasion that 500 lbs. of gun-
powder were found upon
.the premises, but it now ap-
peared that he was
SOUTH SEA STO in makingCK that statement.

The Bishop of OXFORD adverted to the different
position taken up by the late Lord Chancellor from that
which he hitherto occupied upon this question. He
'now advocated, under the guise of a compromise, what
he had before designated as sacrilege. For the sake of
the peace of our Canadian possessions—for the sake of
the prosperity of the Church, he besought them to con-
sider whether it was not the colonists who were the per-
sons justly entitled to deal with this question.
The Bishop of EXETER attacked the doctrines laid
down by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as being closely
allied to Chartism, and concluded by expressing his in-
tention to support the amendment.
The Earl of DERBY, in reply, said that it was impos-
sible for himself and those who sat near him to accept
the designation or the language with which it had pleased
the right rev. prelate near the table (the Bishop of Ox-
ford) to characterise the amendment he had the honour
to submit to them. He could not admit that in bring-
ing forward this amendment they were guilty either of
shuffling or chicanery ; and he thought that the right
rev. prelate would himself feel that some apology was due
to the noble lords whose conduct he had so pointedly
characterised. He had heard with surprise the right rev.
prelate say that our interference in this matter was like
the support of the Church of England in this country by
the intervention of a foreign power—
The Bishop of OXFORD—What I did say was, that
such was the feeling of the American colonies of the im-

In reply to Sir F. KELLY,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said ha
proposed to take the report on the South Sea Stock con-
version bill to-night. He should afterwards lay a new
clause upon the table which he should propose to intro%
duce into the bill, on the motion for the third reading of
the bill. The object of this clause he stated on Friday

portance of self-legislation, that it bore a close analogy
to what would be the feeling of the people of England if
a foreign nation had, interfered, as he had described, in
our affairs.

The Earl of DERBY said that, while he was prepared
to give the Canadian Legislature all the powers of self-
government or domestic legislation which they could
fairly desire or could exercise, he was not prepared to
say that the colony was so independent and separate
from this country that we could, without a violation of
our solemn duty, abandon the rights of property which
we were bound to protect as long as that colony conti-
nued in nominal connection with this country. While
they maintained to the utmost possible extent consis-
tently with their own position the rights of property, he
asked them to concede to the Canadian Legislature all
that they could concede of the rights of self-government,
consistent with those principles which he for one was
not prepared to surrender. (Cheers.)
The Bishop of OXFORD : I must entreat your lord-
ships' indulgence while I briefly refer to one point in the
noble earl's speech. I think your lordships must have
remarked that when I made the quotation to which he
has referred, I did so with a smile, and not with the in-
tention of applying it to noble lords opposite. I have
many friends amongst them, and nothing could be further
from me than the intends to say anything •ffensive to
them. All that I meant to say 'was that you (the Op-
position) would have been defeated in a division on the
second reading of the bill- on Friday evening; and that
thinking you could secure the same effect as would have
attended upon success then, by a judicious amendment
in committee, you took that course.
The Earl of DERBY rose, amidst considerable confu-
sion, and said : I accept, of course, at once the explana-
tion made by the right reverend prelate ; but when he
tells me it was impossible he could mean anything offen-
sive because it was said with a smiling face, I hope he
will excuse me for reminding him of another quotation,
which appears to me to be at least as applicable as that
which he used—" A. man may smile and smile, and be a
villain." [Confusion, and cries of " Who says
"oh ?"

The Earl of CLARENDON advanced to the table,
and exclaimed with vehemence, "It was me ! it was
me ! " We have a right to feel offended by that expres-
sion. (Cheers.) We are not accustomed, my lords, to
hear such expressions in this house. (Renewed cheers.)
Never in this house, not even in the language of poetry,
are we accustomed to hear such a word as " villain."
(" Hear, hear,' and confusion.)
The Earl of DERBY—I must say that the warmth of
the noble earl was quite uncalled for, and the manner in
which he gave expression to it unbecoming the position
which he at present holds. (Oh, and renewed confu-
sion.) He must have heard me say, before I used the
expression alluded to, that I was making a quotation in
which I was quite certain that the right reverend prelate
would feel I was not applying to him the expression it
contained, and that I meant no personal application of
the words, any more than I believe, after the explana-
tion he has given, that he had intended anything per-
sonally offensive to me. It is bootless to vent indigna-
tionn whe none is needed. I can assure him I had not
the slightest intention of doing so, and I cannot think
the feeling of the house at all joins in the somewhat
singular demonstration of wasted wrath he has made.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
house divided. The numbers were :
Content (for the amendment) • 78
Non-Content (against it) ll7

Majority for the Government

The amendment having thus been lost, the clause was
agreed to, as were the remaining clauses, and the house
immediately afterwards adjourned, at a quarter before
one o'clock

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at four o'clock.
KNARESBOROUGH ELECTION.

Mr. WALPOLE brought up the report of the Knares-
borough Election Committee, unseating Mr. Westhead
and declaring Mr. Wood and Mr. Dent duly elected.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

East and West India Docks, and Birmingham Junc-
tion Railway (No. 2) Bill, was read a second time.

PETITIONS.
Mr. E. BALL presented a petition from Cambridge-
shire, against the malt tax ; also a petition in favour of
the ocean penny postage.
Mr. THORNELY presented a petition from Wil-
lenball, in favour of international arbitration.
Mr. A. PELLATT presented a petition from Brixton,
against the opening of the Crystal Palace on Sunday.
Mr. CRAUFURD presented a petition from the cor-
poration of Ayr, in favour of the abolition of the
Scotch University Tests.
Mr. HADFIELD presented a petition from Sheffield,
against the Government Scheme of Education.
Mr. BRIGHT pre:•ented a petition from a public meet-
ing at Manchester, praying that the Government of India
be carried on by ministers directly responsible to the

Crown.
Mr. DIVETT presented a petition from Exeter against
the proposed increase in the cost of licenses to dealers in
obacco and tea.
Mr. LOWE presented a petition from Kidderminster
against the opening of the Crystal Palace on Sunday.
Mr. IL BERKELEY presented ape
the French
Austrian troops.
-

NEW MEMBER.
Lord GODERICII took the oaths and his seat for Hod
dersfield.

MAYO ELECTION.
On the motion of Lord 11. VANE, the evidence
taken before this committee was ordered to be printed.
FINSBURY ELECTION.

The SPEAKER said he had received a communication
from Mr. Baker, the Parliamentary agent, stating that
it was not intended to proceed with the petition against
the return for Finsbury.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.
1
Mr. TUFNELL asked the Secretary for the Home
Department whether it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to introduce, during the present session, any bill
to extend the provisions of the acts 6 and 7 Will. 4, c.
104, 7 Will. 4, and 1 Vic. c. 78, to municipal corpora-
tions not included in the schedule to the Municipal Cor-
porations Act, 5 and 6 Will. 4, c. 76.
Mr. FITZROY said it was not the intention of the
Government to introduce such a measure at present, but
if the right hon. gentleman would bring in a bill on the
subject it would receive the best consideration of the
Government.

( office
to nine instead of ten o'cl in the even.
in .
•", cToEmSßEElZgUavßeEnOoticeßtOhaCtKETon
ThursdayS. •
;--r )Ir. THE
TREDULNA
e would move for the correspondence, in the possession
of the Treasury, relative to Mr. Hale's invention for
making rockets.
DRAWBACKS ON MALT AND
.TAX ON SHEP-
HERDS' DOGS.
In reply to Mr. E. BALL,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he
was afraid it was impossible, with safety to the revenue, to
grantany allowance on malt used by farmers and their ser-
vants. With regard to the tax on shepherds' dogs, no alter-
ation was intended to be made. The tax was always voted
in general terms, and the exemptions were matters of
detail to be afterwards dealt with.
THE INCOME TAX.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to know whether the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, in imposing the income tax on incomes
of 1001. a-year, intended to include the earnings of
junior members of a family, or only the wages of the
husband, or the head of the family.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
question was one of very great importance, but he wasnot
in a condition to give a conclusive reply without looking
back to see what was done under the old income tax act.
Under the new act such a case had not arisen.
POST-OFFICE.
Mr. WARNER wished to ask the Secretary, to the
Treasury, whether the Government will be willing to
take into consideration the case of sorters and other per-
sons employed by the Post-office, not being letter car-
riers, with a view to increasing their pay, in cases where
it may appear inadequate to the services they have to
perform.