The Sun.
London, England, 1838-04-07 00:00:00

Mr. Edward Baines's notice of motion (pot tponed from
Thursday till Monday) for the application a! Qte.e-ti Anne's
Bounty Fund to the increase of the incomes of tkie working
clergy, is one that all rational men, as well as all real friends
to the Church Establishment, must be prompted to support.
lithe Church be injured by anything, it is by the ineordinately
large incomes given to its higher dignitaries, and the in-
adequately small remuneration which is given to its work-
ing members. Queen Anne's Fund, if properly applied,
was intended to counteract this evil, and would go far to-
wards its counteraction. It was devised on a just principle,
though it was not sufficiently carried out. That principle
was to lay a tax upon the large incomes of the Bishops,
and to employ the money so levied in bestowing a better
remuneration on the working clergy. The scale of pay to
the latter, considering that they must have an expensive
education, must be admitted by all equitable persons to
be scandalously low. In reincte parts of the country (and
in Wales especially) clergymen arc seen hurrying through
double duties, at different and distant parish Churches, itt
order to eke out their deficient incomes. Nay, they may not
unfrequently be seen in remote districts working in their own
fields to make up the deficiency. What can be more injurieus
to the reputation, to the welfare, and to the permanence of the
Church than such an exhibition as this, when contrasted, as it
is sure to be, with the opposing picture of episcopal luxury,
wealth, and ostentation exhibited by the establishments and
equipages of the Right Reverend Bench of Prelates in the
metropolitan world of fashion. The incomes of the Bishops
have been left too high by the Established Church Bill.
Had they been equalized to 2,0001. per annum, the
religious public would have deemed it sufficient. How-
ever, we should rather concur with a proposition
once made by Mr. Hume, that they might consistently be
reduced to a level with the incomes of the Judges. The
.necessity of their large incomes has been pleaded on account
of the expenses of the town life they are compelled to lead .by
sitting in the House of Lords. But this is arguing in a
vicious circle. They ought not to sit in the Hausa of Lords.
That they spend their money in charity is contradicted by
the preceding argument : for charity, luxury ought to be sub-
stituted. The neepotism of some of the Bishops, and the
enormous fortunes left by ethers to their relatives, is noto-
rious. All this scandalizes the Establishment in the eyes of
the whole religious community, and impairs its reputation
with the conscientious members of the Establishment itself.
The first Bishops boasted of their self-denying poverty—of their
honest industry and independence. Certeinly there are times and
seasons for all things. We do not mean to argue that we should
go back to the republican community of goods which character-
ized the foundation of the Christian republic, or to the times
when the first Bishop earned his daily bread as a sail-maker,
and boasted, with the honest disdain of an indepcndeint mind,
of rejecting even the contributions of the " voluntary prin-
ciple." A virtual imitation of these models is out of the
question. But at least the principle of Christianity—tiee
essence of which is a profession of poverty, self-denial, humi-
lity, and charity--ought to be adhered to. Not to adhere to,
it--or rather to oppose ostentation to humility, and luxury to
self-denial —is to degrade, and ultimately pave the way for the
subversion of the Church Establishment; for nothing can be
more certain than the fact that the subversion of institutions
follows close on the heels of public contempt. Not to adhere
to the principle is to set up the abomination of religious
hypocrisy—to make the pulpit a venal stage for self-degraded
and self-accusing actors—to proclaim the impunity of irre-
ligion and atheism, and to give the reins to every species d
licence, moral, political, and social.—Morning Advertiser.

It having been understood in the afternoon of yesterday
that Mr. Blackstone, the Chairman of the Shaftesbury Com-
mittee, which has just unseated Mr. Poulter, would bring
under the consideration of the House of Commons, before the
commencement of the ordinary business, a question of privi-
lege, arising upon a letter addressed by the ex-Member to his
electors, the House was very fugly attended at five o'clock.
Mr. Blackstone introduced the subject by expressing the dif-
ficulty he felt in believing that the letter, bearing the signa-
ture of "J. S. Poulter," was really the production of the
late Representative for Shaftesbury. So unmeasured, indeed,
and unparliamentary were the terms in which it was couched,
that it almost appeared to be a piece of bad pleasantry, sent
forth by some splenetic person, who had taken the liberty
of assuming Mr. Poulter's signature. It began by stat-
ing, that " an unprincipled combination" had " been en-
abled to call to its assistance the services of the most
corrupt majority of a Committee that ever degraded the admi-
nistration of justice, and the name of the Commons of Eng-
land." After attacking the revising-barrister (to whose me-
rits, however, both parties in the debate bore honourable testi-
mony), the letter proceeded to speak of the majority of the
Committee as persons " whose ignorance upon the subject
was second only to their corruption." In the same vein, the
letter added that the writer had been " made the victim of a
degree of iniquity, compared with which the irregular acts of
all former Committees may fairly claim to stand excused."
Having read the letter, Mr. Blackstone briefly vindicated the
Committee upon the several points of Mr. Poulter's charge ;
and moved that on Monday next Mr. Poulter and the
printer of the newspaper (the Morning Chronicle) in which
the letter had been published should attend at the bar of the
House. He was followed by Mr. Elliot, the Whig
Radical Member for Roxburghshire, who, though op-
posed to Mr. Blackstone and the majority of the Com-
mittee, both in their general politics and in their adjudication
upon this particular petition, did complete justice to their mo-
tives and principles. Captain Mathew, the Member who had
succeeded on the petition, wished the House to take a lenient
course, on the ground that Mr. Poulter was of an irritable
temper, and must have written this letter under constitutional
. _

excitement. Lord Worslcy wined the motion postponed till
after the printing of the evidence taken before the Committee ;
but to this proposal Mr. Blackstone very properly declined to,
acceded. For, as was observed by Mr. Palmer of Berkshire,
the result of the evidence, and the merits of the case, even if
they should be thought favourable to Mr. Poulter, could never
justify the publication of so violent a charge. The attack
which had been made by Mr. O'Connell on Committees in
general was here, said Mr. Palmer, invidiously concentrul,
and pointed against one particular Committee. Mr. Poul-
ter might probably, on reflection, express his contrition ;
but until he should do so. the House ought to perse-
vere. Mr. O'Connell wanted to know what the house

had gained by the precedent established in his owns case. Ho
would, however, at all events, ho content with summoniag Mr.
Ponher, and not require the printer's attendance. But Sir T.
Fremantle thought it best to have the printer present, lest the

publication should turn out to be a mere squib of some anony-
mous writer. Lord John Russell thought the best way was to
take no notice at all of such matters. He certainly would not
enter into the merits of any trial before a Committee—which
we take to be a very wise resolution in the leaders of the Whig-
Radical party, considering how the Committees of that
colour have generally decided during the present session.
He had no doubt that the latter was genuine, Mr. Poul-
ter being, as had been before observed, of an anxious
temper ; but, for his own part, he
.felt his regard and respect
for his learne,l friend increased by this art now complained
V; for while others were day by day attacking the Commi tees
anonymously, Mr. Poulter had had the frankness to subscribe his
charge with his name. Whether this declaration of the Noble Lord
was equally wise with his resolution to avoid the investigation
of merits—whether it was qu,;te becoming and constitutional in
the leader of the Government, who above all other members
should uphold and vindicate the dicAinity of the House, to Fay
that a Gentleman who had been btsn betrayed into a very
gross attack upon its character had by that outrage risen higher
in his (the leader's) estimation—this is a point to be settled
between the Noble Lor and the House itself, The House
was cleared for a division, at the desire of Mr. O'Connell ;
but he changed his mind in time, and allowed the motion to be
cat- ried.— Times.

LAW INTELIGENCE.

COURT OF CIIANCERY, AnuL 6.
ARAIER V. VOMFRF.T.

This was an appeal from an order of the Vice-Chancellor,
allowing a Mr. Bonnycastle the conduct of the CAMP, in con-
sequence of the trustees of the late• Lord Pomfret having
neglected to pay him an annuity of 2004 a year, and having
otherwise exhibited negligence in the management of his
Lordscip's affairs.
Ilia LORDSII:I' affirmed the order of the Vice-Chancellor.