The Sun.
London, England, 1813-06-18 00:00:00

indeed be distrilinted, hitt in such An eas would
make them of no nse.; they would by mere blanks,
as they Were not filled tilt Mitil the ResohitionS were
passed by a Committee. lie therefore moved, that
:he other Orders of the Day should be read.
Some conver,ation ensued, In which Sir John
Newport, Mr. Barham, and Mr. Wortley partici-
pated ; after, which the motions were withdrawn.
The Report of the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill
was brought up, and on the motion that it should
be agreed to,
Air. WEs7.Bltx spoke at soinelength against the
Bill. No man could be free from the arbitrary
authority of this. arbitrary:Court, and this he
would prove by a case that had occurred some t hilt
back. The party was•it person of considerable re-
spectability and property.. Ile happened to be
one of the assignees of a bankrupt, who, as ap-
peared from his books, had expeuded two-thirds of
his property upon a woman of no respectable cha-
racter. For some words spoken against this wo-
man 'by the. assignee, he was cited before the
Court for defamation. He was however acquit=
ted, and the party prosecuting condemned in
costs. After this acquittal, be was prosecuted
again in the Court of Arches, and found .guilty
upon the very same evidence. Ile was then con-
demned to do Penance, which consisted in con-
fessing. guilt, at the same time that he believed
himself innocent. lie then obtained a dispensa-
tion, for which he was obliged to pay 951.
Sir W. SciYrT said, that in bringing in this
BM he had discharged his duty in a better man-
ner than the Hon.. Gentleman seemed disposed to
admit. The cases alluded to it. was not fair to
introduce in such a manner, and he was certain'
they were all different front what they, were re-
presented. The oppression- complained of could
not possibly be avoided. It parties thought pro,
per to suffer judgment to go •by default, they
-most then of course, as in other Courts, incur the
costs. The ‘votueit allitded to in the course of
the discussiim were fanatics, who refused to put
the matter of their marriage at issue, -and were
therefore punished for contumacy. These worn...en
acted upon ideas that may eventually lead to very:
profligate practices. With respect to the form, of
penance.
.50 much coMplained of, it was no mote
than asking pardon in the Vestry, before the
Clergyman, and one or two more. Such an of-
fence as imputatitmupon character must be tried
SOtnewhere ; and the ancient law had referred it
to the Ecclesiastical Courts.

sir JOHN NicHOL-detetred the conduct of the
'Judge in. the .case alluded to by. the ITon. Gentle-
man (Mr.. Western.). lie did fot.know what vt;as
meant. by . a dispensation. The %IL alluded to
must have been the costs incurred.

Sir S. ROM ILLY (10 not agree with those who
thought that little good would arise from the
BUI: No decision could have been made in the
case alluded to but that '%vlrich was made. It was
not the Judge that should. be condemned for that
decision, but thc Court iisclF. Ile did not ap-
prove of the wanner• in which the required pe-
nance was. performed. The great evil of the
Courts was the expence, and also the manner in
which evidence wa4 taken. if the business could
'be done by a Jury in these Courts, justice would
he better adniinistered. lie would Wish to have
the 13A1 reconimittecl for the purpose of proposing
some el:lll6es.-

Mr. W. Smyrtr, speaking of the women al.
bided to by the 'Right lionourahle. Baronet (Sir
NV, Scott), said;ilint though they might have been
foolish or fanatic, it WaS clear from their conduct
that they werenotprofiipte. lie comlemned the
form in which penance was performed ; it resein-
bled in principle the proceedings of the Inquisi-
tion, by ohliging.a man to confess himself guilty,
when,. perhap•s, lie was conscious of innocence.
STIT tt EN said, if he were to propose any
amendment, it should have-reference to the proof
of the imputation upon character ; he would not
take away the jurisdiction of the Court. The Bill
-vas then t'coaunitted.

Sir S. Romit,m,' proposed two clauses, one re-
quiring'. certain qualitieations for the Judges in the
Ecclesiastical Courts ; and the other providing
Nat no suit should be commenced for the pavment
of tithessafter six years had elapsed from the pe-
riod of their becoming due, The clauses wct-e
brought up and agreed to, and the Bill ordered to
1)e read a t«,ii:d time to-morrow.

Deputy ltententbraucer of the Exchequer's.
Bill Was ordered to be taken into further consi-
sleratinn, on Th ursday nes t.
The second reading of the. Stipendiary Curates
Bill teas ordered to be read a second time to-
morrow.

• The report of the Committee on the Corn Laws.
Was ordered to be recommitted 1)0 Modily.

The Irish Tobacco Bill went through a Com-
mittee, the Report of which was rt,-ceived, and the
Bill ordered to be read ~third tjnie to-morrow.

The Irish iilery Bill went•throligh Com-
mittee, the Report of ‘vhielt was ordered to be re-
ceived to-morrow.

• The other Ordvt s of the Day \vete disposed of,
and the House Adjourned.