The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-01 00:00:00

LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 1, 1853.

NEW. WORK BY HORACE ST. JOHN.
Just I,ll..lithed, in 2 vols. post Bvo., price 21s. cloth,
THE-INWAN ARCHIPELAGO ; Its History
and Present State.

By HORACE ST. JOHN,
Author of " History of the British Conquest in India," " Life of
Christopher Columbus," &o.
London: Longman, Brown, Greco, and Longrnans.

TIIE TRAVELLER'S LIBR
Published, in 16m0., price Half-a-crown, or in 2 Parts, price Is. each,
EMOIRS of a MAITRE D'ARMES ;
.01_ Or, Eighteen Months at St Petei sburg.
By ALEXANDRE DUM AS.
Translated by the Marquis of ORIIONDE ; and forming Parts
XXXVIII, and XXXIX. of the "Traveller's Library."
Also, forming Part XXXVII. of the " Traveller's Library,"
' RANKE'S FERDINAND I. and MAXIMILIAN 11. of AUSTRIA.
Xranslated by Lady DUFF Goanore.
• • London : Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans.

POSTAL ERRORS.—Gratis on application, or
post free for two stamps, a Review of the DITISiOII of "Watkimas
Directory for 1853," entitled (amusingly enough), " Postal Infor
Lion." The Review proves an amount of blunders and omissions
probably never equalled in any work on the same subject.
HOUSE of cpIII,IONS : BLUNDERS :
Gratis on application, or post free for two stamps, a " Review
of the Members of the /louse of Commons," as ~contained in
" Watkins's London Directory ft r 1853," showing upon these im.
Portant names no less than seven hundred and forty blunders.

VALSEIIOOD :—Gratis on application, or post
_l2 free for two stamps, " Disproof" of the falsehoods contained
in ,a handbill now distributing with the view to injure the " Post-Office
London Directory ;" and a Review proving, in names selected by
F. W. Watkins, a proportion of error giving for the Street Key of
Vatking's Leaasicia..DiresApry, tor :115.43'! One,,nundred,aud thirteen
' '

ousancl blunders.
'IV As there is reason to believe that the unsold copies of Wat-
kin's Directory will (with some trifling addenda) be produced as a
" March Edition," persons importuned to purchase the work, should,
before pledging themselves to do so, obtain these Reviews, when (as
the page at which each error occurs is quoted) they can readily test
whether the book offered is a new edition or contains these
blunders.
l(elly and Co., 19 and 20, Old Boswell-court, London.

G R A

N, other Packets
The Packets call
FRO]

Terrace
Pier.

7M
•t 8
t 94
11%

WEEK

Time,

s% I

11%
-
-

Direct Trains from the Boats marked
Omnibuses from Fenchurch-street Station S
every quarter of an hour.
BRUNSWICK WHARF, BLACKWALL, on t
lowing Trains from the Fenchurch-str(

Time.

[24
2)A
,5%

ners.
ing)

parts of London

•tval of the fol-

WEEK DAYS.

2-g

Time.

Cation.

; 4
I
5
14_

- I -

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS--(YESTERDAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR took hiA'seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.
`Trie Archbishop of YORK presented several petitions,
praying for inquiry into the College of Maynooth.
The Archbishop of CANTERI3URY presented a pe-
tion, praying for Parliamentary papers.
The Earl of MALMESBURY gave notice that he
would to-morrow move for certain returns relative to
•
accidents; on railways during the last year, and that he
would draw the attention of the Government to the sub-

j ect.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented a petition from
Portsmouth, in favour of the admission of Jews into
Parliament.
REGISTRATION OF ASSURANCES BILL.
Lord ST. LEONARDS gave notice that on the motion
for the secon,d'xeading of this bill, which stood on the
paper for Thursday next, he should move that the bill
be read a second time this day sia months.
The Earl lof DERBY presented several petitions
against the admission of Jews into Parliament. The
noble lord said that if the bill which had been intro-
ducedinto the other house by a small majority were
brought into this house, he hoped that their lordships
would deal with it as they had dealt with former bills.
The LaW pf Evidence (Scotland) Bill was passed
through committee.
CANADIAN CLERGY RESERVES.
The Earl of DERBY again rose and Said.—My lords, I
I have now to call your lordships' attention to the prayer of
64 or 65 petitions- to which, ..,.portance of the
subject to which they-vela z; right; to call
your lordships' attention by placing a notice on the papers

of the house. These petitions are from various bodies be-
longing to the Church of Scotland in Canada. [His lord-

ship here enumerated several of the bodies from whom the
petitions emanated, but the names were inaudible in the

gallery; 59 of the petitions were from congregations con-

nected with the Presbyterian Church of Scotland in

Canada.] It is right, the noble lord proceeded to say, that

I should state that the object of these petitions is all the

same, though expressed in various terms. They pray that
your lordships will preserve inviolate the arrangement en-

tered into in the year 1840, and that your lordships will

not interfere with, nor suffer to be interfered with, that
arrangement with regard to the clergy reserves in Canada.
It is quite right that I should state that a portion of these

petitions were prepared so long ago as 1851, and that they

were then brought over with the intention of being pre-
sented against a bill of a similar character, which was at
that time before the Legislature. It was then the inten-
tion to place them in the hands of the noble duke, the
Lord Privy Seal (the Duke of Argyll), to whose active and

unremitting services the house and the country were mainly
indebted for the withdrawal of that bill. The withdrawal

of that bill rendered the presentation of those petitions
unnecessary, and equally unnecessary was it, after the de-
claration of her Majesty's late Government, of which I
was a member, to present any petition or petitions during

1852, but upon the accession of the present Government,
those who were connected with the Church of Scotland felt
it to be their duty to renew and reiterate the expression of
their former opinions, and they have authorised me to state
that these opinions of the congregations of the great body

of the Church of Scotland remain unaltered. And un-

doubtedly these petitions would have been placed in 1853
as in 1851 in the hands of the noble duke opposite, but
that the petitioners apprehended that they would thereby

cause some embarrassment to the noble duke, who might

not feel himself at the same liberty in 1851 to afford his
valuable assistance to the petitioners; and in consequence
of the position now occupied by the noble duke, I have

been requested by the petitioners to present their petitions

in place-of him who would have stated their case with
much more ability and power, and to pray the earnest at-

tention of your lordships to this subject. I confess that it
is without any surprise ,that I saw the present bill, of
which notice has been given to the other house, introduced
by some portion of the Government. I regret undoubtedly
to see that it has been taken up by the Government, and
that it has been brought forward by them as a Government
measure. I regret it because, without meaning any disre-
spect to them, I cannot but look upon this measure as one
that will deprive the Protestant Church in Canada of rights
which they as ministers are bound to defend, and as a viola-
tion of the rights of property of which they are the legiti-
mately constituted guardians. If I could look upon it in
any more trivial light, I should not be insensible to the
many conveniences and temptations to a Minister to acqui-
esce in the introduction of the bill, because I do not seek
to conceal that the object of this measure is one greatly de-
sired by a large portion of the people of Upper and Lower
Canada, by a largo majority of the people of the united
province, and by a considerable portion of the people of the
upper province. I cannot deny also the general plausibility
of the argument that it is right to leave to the colonial legis-
lature the management of their own property and regulation
of their own internal affairs ; and I am not insensible to the
advantage to be derived to any one who proposes to Parlia-
ment a modewhich can recommend itself to their consciences
of getting rid of a considerable amount of business, in re-
gard to which they feel themselves imperfectly informed.
But my sense of public duty as a Minister compelled me to
refuse to assent to that of which I saw the expediency, but
of which I felt the viciousness of principle ; and the same
sense of duty which led me, as a Minister, to refuse my
assent, leads me on the present occasion to support the prayer
of these petitioners, and to entreat your lordships not to
sanction this measure. I have said, my lords, that I admit
the plausibility—nay, I admit much more—l admit the
justice of leaving to the colonial legislature as far as possible
the management of their peculiar internal affairs. In 1840,
when the civil list was reserved by an act of the Imperial
Legislature out of the revenues of Canada, that interference
with the property of the colonists was held by them to be
highly objectionable ; and although under the circumstances
it was impossible to avoid coming to such a measure,
yet it was with great satisfaction that I gave my assent as
Secretary of State to the introduction of a measure by which,
upon the colonial legislature passing by its own authority,
sucks civil list as might be accepted by the Crown, the sta-
tute of the Imperial Legislature dealing with their property
wad repealed. The consequence was that that civil list rested
on the authority of the colonial legislature. My lords, I will
go further, and say that I do notthink that the mere impolicy
of aparticular as it might strike a Secretary of
State or the Mi arrangement,nister forthe time being, would be a sufficient
reason for refusing the assent of the Crown to that which
might be proposed by the colonists and passed by the colonial
legislature. In 1850 the Government which preceded me
had refused upon more than ens occasion their assent, upon
the ground of impolicy, to measures passed by the colonial
legislature for countervailing bounties and privileges granted
to American seamen by the American Government, by coun-
tervailing duties on the part of the colonial legislature, and
in refusing to assent to acts passed by the colonial
legislature the ground taken was that those measures were
at variance with the general principle of free trade. My
lords, I mention this merely for the purpose of showing that
with regard to acts of the colonial legislature I am not averse
to leaving them the management of their own affairs bearing
on their own interests; and consequently, without expressing
any opinion with regard to the policy of granting bounties
to colonial seamen on the part of the Legislature, I consented
to the measures of my predecessors, and I permitted the
colonial legislature to deal with their own revenues as they
thought fit for the promotion of their own interests. But
my opposition to the measure now under consideration is,
that in this case the colonists are seeking to deal, not
with their own property, but with that which never
was their own property, over which they never had
the right to exercise any control, and which, by competent
authority and the strongest guarantees, had not only been
otherwise appropriated and taken out of their jurisdiction
previously to the establishment of their constitution, but
which upon two occasions was made one of the funda-
mental conditions upon which that very constitution
rested. It was as early as the year 1775, when the Crown
exercised an uncontrolled authority over the then province
of Quebec, that it was thought necessary and expedient,
when the principal guarantee was given for the exercise of
the religion and the maintenance of the property of the
Roman Catholic inhabitants of Lower Canada, to afford
inducements to Protestants to settle in the province of
Quebec by the promise that they at all times to come
should have the security within that province, as an in-
ducement, to Protestant churches of one-seventh part of
the lands of the Crown, to be guaranteed and appropriated
as those lands accrued. There are at present residing in
Canada many of the descendants of those who, quitting
the United States, settled in the province on the strength
of that guarantee, and on the faith of the British Crown,
that in all times to come provision should be made from
the lands of the province for the Protestant clergy, and
the dissemination of the Protestant faith. My lords, I
from that time to this
mention it to the credit of the United States, that there
are at this moment, in various of those states, endowments
to the Episcopal Church of this country,
ceipnldeowmof
thatents
g
which were created previous to the revolution, and which
werereat whollyßepublic,
which,othe
been held sacred,bu and the rights of property have in' have
favour
of that Church been respected and upheld. What we ask
is, that the British Parliament shall not be less just than
the Republic of the United States has been to its own sub-
jects and to the Episcopal Church. I said that in 1775
this provision was made by royal proclamation. In 1791,
as your lordships are aware, the two provinces of Upper
and Lower Canada were separated—these institutions were
remodelled and a constitutional government was given to
the province of Upper Canada; and lot me observe in pass-
ing that it is mainly, though not perhaps exclusively, to
the province of Upper Canada, or that portion of it to
which this question relates, that constitutional government
was given, and in the very act which constituted and esta-
blished that province there was reserved, by the power of
the Legislature, and confirmed by the Crown and by the
act of the Imperial Parliament, that reservation of the
clergy reserves which had been previously given by royal
proclamation in 1775. I am not speaking of the policy
of that endowment, or of the reason or farsighted-
ness of the separation of the two provinces. I am
not speaking of the meaning which may be involved in the
terms " Protestant clergy," but there is no doubt that at
the time when that grant was made, that time being pre-
vious to the establishment of the constitution itself, and of
the rights of the subjects of the Crown in Canada, that
special reservation was made of one-seventh of the land
under authority perfectly competent to make it, and made,
too, in the most solemn terms by the act of the British
Parliament for the maintenance, for all times to come,
of the Protestant clergy in that province. Therefore,
I contend that the alienation of that one-seventh,
being already alienated and appropriated by authority
perfectly competent, being sanctioned by the highest au-
thority of the Crown and act of Parliament, being de-
r dared to be a permanent endowment, and being the in-

ducement by. which many loyal Protestants were led to
settle in that province, on the faith of the Crown and of
Parliament—l say this is not a subject with which the
provincial Legislature can claim to deal; it is private pro-
perty, withdrawn and exempted from their jurisdiction at
.the very time when that general jurisdiction was conferred
:upon them. For a very considerable period of time those
reserves were altogether unproductive. They were more
than unproductive, because, there being no power to sell
any portion, bul only power of leasing, in a country where
leasing was unknown, and the possession of property was
l'essily acquired, it was impossible to realise any consider-
able sum for the maintenance of the clergy, and in the
mean time the lands remained uncultivated and waste, an
impediment to the advancement and general progress of
the provinces. In 1819, a question arose, and an opinion
was given by three very learned persons—Lord Gifford,
then Attorney-General, Sir Christopher Robinson, and a
noble and learned lord, who was at that time Solicitor-
General, Lord Lyndhurst—to the effect that by the term
" Protestant clergy " was meant the clergy, not merely of
the Church of England, but the clergy of the Presbyterian
Church of Scotland, and the clergy of other denomina-
tions. Ido not pretend to say how far that opinion might
have been in accordance with the original intention of the
royal proclamation and the Act of Parliament. If I might
venture to hazard an opinion, it would be that in 1791
the endowment of the Church of Scotland did not enter
into the intentions of the founders of the Canadian consti-
tution, but that it was intended to endow the Church of
England merely under the terms " Protestant clergy.'
However, the opinion being given, and on very high au-
thority, that whatever might be the original intention,
the terms " Protestant clergy " did not include the
Church of Scotland, from that - time Secretaries of State
and Governors of Canada successively acted upon that
principle, and in point of fact the proceeds of the reserves,
such as they were, were apportioned between the Church
of England and the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. In
1827 the inconvenience lo Widish, I haps before,,adverted
was-ad-flinch- inerearect,-Th'iran act of Parliament was'
passed, not by the colony, but by the Imperial Parliament
namely, the 7th and Bth Gee. IV., by which authority
was given, not only to lease, but to sell a certain amount
of the reserves, and invest in British security the proceeds
of such sales, the proceeds of course to be applied to the
same purposes as the land. Under that Act of Parlia-
ment the rererves gradually became, more productive
and more an object of interest to the various denomi-
nations ; and I cannot conceal from your lordships that
at that time the province of Upper Canada, being
largely increased in population by inhabitants from
the United States amongst whom there was a strong
feeling against any endowment of any religious denomina-
tion whatever, there did spring up a strong and earnest
desire to deal with those clergy reserves, some persons de-
siring to appropriate them to the general maintenance of
all denominations, some being anxious to devote them to
purposes of education, while some were willing to secu-
larise them all together, and to devote them to the pur-
poses of the State. This was a subject of frequent con-
flict from 1827 to 1840. At that period a great change, as
your lordships are aware, took place in the Government of
Canada. After the suppression of the rebellion it was
deemed necessary, or, at all events, advisable, to provide
for the future government of Canada, and it was hoped that
in so providing for it dissensions between the two paervinces
might be avoided by amalgamating in one Chamber the
legislatures of Upper and Lower Canada. At that time
it was fejt that, with regard to the religious endowments,
more especially, that amalgamation of the provinces must
produce an extraordinary change of circumstances ; that
whereas, to a certain extent, by provision of the act of
1791, the provincial legislature, subject to the control of
Parliament, had a prospective power of altering the
arrangements with regard to the reserves, and of modifying
the future allotment of the proportions, it was a very dif-
ferent thing to have that power vested in a united legisla-
ture, nearly one-half of whom were Roman Catholics, and
who, by a union with the minority of the upper province,
might have the power of altogether secularising the endow-
ment, and of diverting it from its original purposes. It
was felt, therefore, that it was necessary at the time of
establishing the union between the two provinces again to
confirm it in the most emphatic manner, and in the
strongest terms, the original appropriation of the reserves
or the proceeds of them to the purposes of the Protestant
clergy, and to make provision for the permanence of that
arrangement, whatever might be the future views of the
united legislature with regard to 'those endowments. Mr.
Poulett Thomson, wlsen Governor-General of Canada, ob-
tained, with considerable difficulty, from the legislature of
the upper province an act which, to a certain extent, car-
ried into effect the original intention, by securing an en-
dowment, though only a partial one, for the clergy of the
Church of England and of the Church of Scotland. An
act was passed by which those reserves,. and the proceeds
of those reserves, were ever hereafter set apart for the en-
dowment in certain proportions of the Church of Scotland
and other denominations of Christians, for the mainte-
nance of public worship. When that bill, in pursuance of
the provisions of the act of 1791, was submitted to the
Parliament—for it was one of the provisions of the original
act that the measures of the colonial legislature must be
submitted to the consideration of both houses of Par-
liament before receiving the sanction of the Crown
—upon laying that bill upon the table of the house,
the question arose whether the local legislature had
not, in so dealing with those reserves, exceeded the
Power conferred upon them by the original act.
Questions were submitted to the consideration of the judges
whether in three specified points the Legislature had not
• exceeded their powers; and the judges, by the mouth of
Lord Chief Justice Tindal, on the 4th of May, 1840, stated
that all the judges, with the exception of Lord Denman
and Lord Abinger, were unanimous in their answers to the
questions which had been put to them. They were unani-
mous in assorting that the words " a Protestant clergy"
did extend beyond the narrow construction which would
have limited the clergy reserves to the clergy of the Esta-
blished Church. And when asked what other denomina-
tions might be included besides the Church of England,
they added that the Church of Scotland also might be in-
cluded. They were asked whether the effect of the 41st
section, by which the local legislature, subject to certain
condition, were authorised to modify the appropriation,
was to be considered as applying prospectively or retros-
pectively, as applying to the allotments and appropriations
previously made, or such as might be the produce of sales
thereafter to be made. Upon that subject the judges were
unanimous in declaring that the colonial legislature had
exceeded their powers—that they had no power under the
original act to deal retrospectively—that the rights of pro-
perty were beyond the control of the legislature—and that
all they had the power of doing, even subject to the control
of Parliament, was the prospective disposal of the funds
thereafter to be raised. They further stated that they
were all of opinion that the legislative council and assem-
bly in Canada had exceeded their authority in passing an
act to provide for the sale of the clergy reserves, and the
distribution of the proceeds thereof, in respect of both the
enactments specified in your lordships' question—that was
in reference to the power granted in-1827 to sell certain
portions of the clergy reserves, specially vesting the pro-
ceeds of the sale in British securities ; whereas, the colo-
nial legislature had appropriated the proceeds of the sale,
and vested them in colonial securities. Upon all these
three subjects the judges were unanimously of opinion
that the local legislature had gone beyond their powers,
and had dealt with subjects over which they could exercise
no control. It was, therefore, necessary to introduce a
measure into the Imperial Parliament to remove the seri-
ous difficulties which had arisen to the settlement of that
great and important question ; and after grave discussion
and deliberation, after no slight amount of objection from
those who thought that by the act so introduced their
rights were seriously infringed, Parliament, with tolerable
unanimity, sanctioned the adoption of a measure by which
a settlement of the dispute in question was made, and by
which, for the second time, in establishing anew the con-
stitution of Canada, the right was secured to the Imperial.
Parliament alone to deal with the question of the clergy re-
serves, which,as smatter of property,were again withdrawn
from the control of the colonial legislature. That bill was
introduced by the noble lord the present leader of the
House of Commons, and it was impossible to exaggerate the
strength of the expressions with which the noble lord al-
luded to the partial departure from the act of 1791. He
emphaticallydeclared that it was all-important and essential
that this great question should be finally and at once with-
drawn from the possibility of future controversy, and that
a settlement should be made which should be accepted by
all denominations as final, and which should ultimately re-
store, by the authority of the Imperial Parliament, peace
upon this much vexed question to the legislature of Canada,
by withdrawing the question from their jurisdiction.
(Hear.) And to show the animus by which the Govern-
ment of that day, composed of a large portion of the mem-
bers of the present Government, were actuated, I may state
that they, in a most marked manner, omitted from that
new act the conditional permission granted in the act of
1791, to deal prospectively with any portion of the re-
serves. Under that act an arrangement was made by
which a distinction was drawn, following the decision
given by the judges, between property already realised and
property thereafter to be realised. Two-thirds of the
amount already realised was reserved for the clergy of the
Church of England, and one-third for the clergy of the
Church of Scotland ; and these reserves were vested in
bodies constituted for the purpose, and charged with the
administration of these funds. The funds so dealt with
amounted to but one-fourth of the estimated amount of
the whole of the clergy reserves ; and with regard to the
other three-fourths, similar arrangements were made. The
three-fourths were divided into two equal portions. With
regard to one of those portions, it was divided between the
clergy of the Church of England and the clergy of the
Church of Scotland. The other half was left entirely to
the disposal of the colonial legislature, to be dealt with as
they might think fit for the great object of promoting religi-
ous worship, and even going such a length, in their desire of
conciliating all parties within the province, and to leave
no cause of complaint, as to omit the words " a Protestant
clergy," and to allow the application of a portion of that
half to be applied not only to Protestant dissenters, but to
be employed for the purposes of the Roman Catholic
clergy. The Governor-General of Canada, on that occa-
sion, went the length of saying that, unless this question
were then finally and for ever disposed of, the union of the
two provinces would be useless, and worse than useless ;
and up to the year 1846 the most liberal members of the
provincial Parliament held the strongest possible language
with regard to the finality of that arrangement, declaring
that they adopted it as a permanent and final settlement,
and that they would look upon it as a curse to the country
if it was not observed. My lords, it is the maintenance of
that establishment, of that contract, and of those rights of
property so solemnly and so repeatedly guaranteed, that the
petitioners, not desirous of disputing the rights of the
colonists to deal with affairs exclusively their own, pray
that your lordships will not sanction a departure from
the great settlement then made—will not deprive them
of the rights and property guaranteed by the highest au-
thority—and will not again introduce into Canada the con-
sideration of elements of religious discord which must lead I
to interminable confusion. (Hear.) The object of the
great bulk of those who are seeking the right to deal with
this property is not, as your lordships might be led to sup-
pose, an appropriation and allotment amongst the various
religious denominations, more in accordance with their re-
spective numbers, and with the liberties of a country in
which no dominant Church will be tolerated or supported.
The object is one of a very different character. The object
is to alienate from religion altogether that provisio
the piety of former sovereigns and former
granted for its support, and to introduce throughoutll parliamentshlceh
length and breadth of Canada the republican
voluntaryism adopted in the United States. (Plslillicire °f
ear. Do
•the