The Sun.
London, England, 1836-04-20 00:00:00

to in
(1 re how the Crown disposed of the amount of that set-
Plnvate
Tuent than it bad to inquire into the disbursement of any
/t would be a direct interference with the
I,::!erogo.tive of the Crown to do so. The Hon. and Learned
irul,h.er for Southwark had talked of heading 100,000 men on
th'easekheath. He recollected that about four centuries ago
sare
7.. was another Reformer, who headed 100,000 men on the
. spot, one Jack Cade.—(Hear, and a laugh.)
ae CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER merely
ro, je to
correct a mis-statement which the Hon. and Learned
It,i_e_mber who brought forward the motion had made respecting
___!urn of 6,0001., which he alleged had be!,u conveyed to the
rivy. purse since the settlement of the Civil List. Now he
''.°°;t! assure the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that not one
'dining of the droits of the Crown had gone to the privy
*purse, or had been diverted from the public use since the set-
-I,t„lernenet of the Civil List.---( Cheers.) The Honourable and
zinte*(l d Gi,intleman had challenged any dozen names to be
thed out in the Pension List who were deserving of the
-tons they received. He would accept that challenge of
"cm. and Learned Gentlemer:,, and he would name Dr.
Dalton, Mr. Ivory, •Professor Airev, Mrs. Somerville, Dr.
:...oSouthey Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Sharon Turner, Sir James
_u,tshe, Mr. Muore, and Mr. Farraday.—( Cheers.) He could
"tug the Attraber, but lie should not detain the House any
°Alger.
andAftgira few words from Colonel Barry, Colonel Sibthorp,
questior B. E Codrington, amidst loud cries of " Question,
9
f fir- HARVEY rose to reply, which be should do in a
Lowords The Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) had that
Lb
re/ proved on
Otte thing very clearly--that if he had been no
h/
would have been no Minister. He might have held
tin3°rne subordinate situation, but he had shown himself utterly
?v•orthy of being a leader. A Minister who aimed at being
leader of that House ought to be superior to all small per-
nadalities such as the Noble Lord had availed himself of that
/3lght. He (Mr. Har..vev) should not have complained of those
Personalities had they been introduced incidentally, or in the
LYBrse of casual '..rebate ; but when the Noble Lord came down
rnteratticallY to the House, with a pamphlet in his pocket
th-- Which to select ground for his personalities, be betrayed
e feeblene!,s of his cause in the vulgarity of those personali.
les' He viould ask the Noble Lord was there not a member
'rU th the Noble House of Bedford on this very Pension List, and
Yat pension earned b a servic? As to ay alteration
2° his motion, he had told the Nobles Lord of his nintention to
alter it. He admitted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had Properly corrected him as to the 6,0001. from the droits
Intof C;rown but his error was caused by the returns on the
..Great' praise bad. been given to Lord Sidmouth for
13„41"g give nup a pension of 3,0001. a-year the other day ;
„",,` the fact was that he never should have had the pension,
even now that it was given up, the country would not be-
Le,."t by it, for it had not been surrendered forty-eight hours
Age r) there was a scramble for it amongst the Members of
-ge Government themselves.—( Cheers and laughter.) He
"eged to ask if a pension of 2,0001. had not already been
-nted to Lord Glenelg for life out of the sum given by Lord
Idrnouth ?---(Cheers.)
Li The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—The
on• and Learned Member is entirely wrong.—( Cheers.)
Mr. HARVEY—Neither given nor in contemplation.—
(13h, oh.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—CertainIy
not.--( Cheers. )
Mr. Ft ARVEY—Never in contemplation ?
I„,l'u CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Never.
air. HARVEY—Well, he would give that up.—(Oh, oh!)
r:'itit respect to the list of names which. the Chancellor of the
k,xchequer had read as deserving pensions, they had all been
4'laced on the list since 1830. The Noble Lord had said that
.°IIIY two insignificant petitions had been presented on the sub-
ject, and all he (Mr. Harvey) could declare was, that he
never should bring the question before the House again until
liu're petitions had been laid upon the table than the Noble
Lord could lift.__( A laugh.) He denied that the public were
Lard
to the subject, but until the people expressed their
'wishes he was willing to admit that the matter should be left
'undisturbed.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, and the num-
uers Were—.
For the motion
Against 216
Majority 7O
4 The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
°use adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'Clock

HOUSE OF LORDS, APRIL 19.
The gallery was not open till twenty minutes past 5 o'clock.
BETTER OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH.
Lord SEGRAVE presented petitions from the Wesleyan
methodists of Gloucester praying for the better observance of
the Lord's Day.
The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition to the like

GREAT NNESTERN RAILWAY.
the NOBLE LonD presented a petition from Bristol in favour of
-"e G. eat Western Railway Bill.
CHELTENHAM AND GREAT WESTERN
RAILWAY BILL.
Lord SEGRAVE presented a petition from Stroud in 'our of of the Cheltenham and Great Western Railway.
The Noble Lord then presented petitions against it, and certain
Parts of the line of it, from Pearson Thompson, of Cheltenham,
for certain inhabitants of Cheltenham ; from the Directors of
onlirany formed for the purpose of making a Railway from
The Ctenham to or near Oxford; and from R. Ka of London.
Noble Lord then moved that the Cheltenhamy, and Green-
ri"'Ch Railway Bill be read a second time, that it be corn-
fted on Wednesday se'nnight, and that the several petitions
Ae had presented should be referred to the Committee.—
'greed to.
SHEFFIELD AND ROTHERHAM RAILWAY.
A NOBLE LORD whose name wt-: could not learn, presented
Petition from St. Alban's aga.lnst this Bill.
CHELTENHAM AND GREAT WESTERN
RAILWAY.
The F.,arl of COL CHESTER presented two petitions
against This Bill, from the owners of land on the line of road.
..,,,11T.UNICIPAL ACTS' AMENDMENT BILL.
shne Marquis of SALISBURY presented a petition-from
,a
* to7,4erland against certain provisions of this Bill.—Referred
e Committee on the Bill.
,0, number of petitions were presented, praying for the better
ii..7riance of the Sabbath, by the Bishops of London, Car-
-111; and several Noble Lords.
l!Lord HATHERTON presented petitions from the Dis-
'ers of Chalwick, praying for a redress of their grievances.
h 'he Bishop of HEREFORD presented a petition from
e •
refrd, against the Swinton line of the Cheltenham and
%ford Railway.
t„u:•dord OUNCANNON presented returns connected with
order constabulary force in Ireland, made out according to the
been 04.: the House, as closely as possible. There had not
thell time
oneh for
table these being printed, but he begged leave to lay
e .
reti;4ll- HADDINGTON thanked the Noble Lord for the
0r:1`,,, and hoped they would be printed forthwith.
ord, stile motion of Lord LANSDOWNE, a Return was
in 'lrect of all the mandamuses, &c. which were now pending,
,er°,nsectuence of the working of the Municipal Bill.
13ri ne LORD CHANCELLOR gave notice that he would
'bang in his Bills for correcting the abuses of Chancery on
prsday next.
Vanswer to a o:aestiou by Lord MOUNTRAGLE,
at_ arl MINT° said, as all the arrangements were not yet
of the he could say no more than that it was the intention
kout,e. 901terntnent to suppress the Naval College at Po!ls-
an r Lle; 4 could not, however, be done this year; but certainly
last e-ternption of a pledge given to the House of Commons
itself, Session, it should be given up if it did not support
snide HOW naval architecture was to be taught to the young
"the 11t Was now under the consideration of the Government.
bat ble Earl defended Captain Symonds, and said that
aoffieer had diecharged the duties of his office in an exem-
txtYeriltaianner, and that he had constructed vessels which, on
Lord "t,-'
kdd been found eminently successful.
then ‘-=(-)L CHE STER said a few words, and the subject
4-oPped.

PLURALITIES BILL.
The Archbishop of CA. NT.E PBUR Y, in rising to move.
vs,asseeond reading of this Bill, 'said, by the present Bill it
the Pro Posed to repeal the whole of the Statutes respecting
ux government of the Church, and to embody them in one
toe?„4re--a measure which he sincerely hoped would tend
Viiie.rne the efficacy of the Church. The Act of Henry
Port--'4` away with pluralities, but with certain very im-
At FUL exceptions. As matters now stood, two benefices.eum_
'he ulYe miles distance might be held by any
bittl; being a chaplain to a Nobleman or a Doctor ofinD.ivi-
es : A Clergyman might also hold. a preferment in a
ile-tfiucedrai, or •
in a cathedral or a collegiate church, and a be-
Leave at the same time. Such a system he thought pressed
41e,, 43' uPon the Clergy, ter it afforded the opporfunit(reo!
fer`re ulating in one individual too much ecclesiastical p
the nt, and at the same time it led to non-residence.t By
these
evilspresent Bill it was proposed to apply a remedy
tiro , One of its provisions enacted that in no case moore than
diet
diaut benefices should be held together, and that only‘ 0,,4ti0e of ten miles from the one church to the other. I
it ler to prevent any accumulation of cathedral preferment,
eh ja,s enacted that no more than one cathedral preferment o,iuld be held at the same time with one benefice. The
areLexoeption made to this regulation was in the case ofd
Ivermeacons, who had very arduous duties to perform, a.n
n,,,,1,,,,,! often very inadequately paid. Another restriction
! the holding of two livings within ten miles was, that
ele
t. benefice should be of more than 500/. per annum
Iviltiteh value. There were some provisions in the Bill
Parishn some degree softened these restrictions. In
not sus` with a small population, in which the funds were
gasffieient for the maintenance of a Clergyman, a union
ex.treinly desirable and consequently the Bill contained
Therrb_vision to facilitate the union of contiguous parishes.
expetlieviere some cases in which a dissolution of unions was isiuti. Ti), and to effect that end the Bill also contained a pro-
handsall unn of the great evils of the
.Church was admitted on
vihere t° e non-residence ; and it was
.also admitted that
deerea P uralities were diminished non-residence would also
Years s He held in his hand a return made seven or eight
sons noa,go, from which it appeared that the number of per-
Was 0,,' residing on their benefices on account of. exemptions
other "wards of 2 000, and the number of non-residents, from
the cuses was' und roo He should not dwell upon
Bideral•lbt of grantingerejxem.ptions, for he thought the on-
Ttlittetlen of their proprict had better be decided in Coln-
the till At the same timey it was necessary to observe thath
etexops. thd not intend to deprive existing incumbents of t e
ProviP.'ions 1,
"ich they now enjoyed. The Bill contained a
of oseTo to facilitate the borrowing of money for the rebuilding
ttvezit 'Jo houses
, et' extended the period Of the payments to kw:, Or thirty years. in
e certainly the
enforce residenceinterfere, then the common process was open.