The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARMA N

HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNE 10.
DISFRANCHISEMENT
BOROUGH OF STAFFORD
BILL.
seatAt
onliathlfe-p‘ays,ut four
otiu ,k('clock the
.) LORD C_IIANCELLOR took his
p
Witnesses were examined at the bar upon this
further consideration of which was postponed till
going into evidence with respect to the last election._ _
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE OF COMMwN
Sir JOIN YARDE BULLER, Mr. ENVART, and other MENIBERS
of the House of Commons, brought up the Liverpool Fire
Police Bill, and several private Bills.
The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from Croy-
donthe
against the South Eastern Railway Bill.
The Duke of.BUCCLEUG II presented a petition from
Edinburgh against the Edinburgh and Leith Railway 01"
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY pre_s:
from Brook-street Chapel, praying for
of the Sabbath.
petitions from the Congregation of Red Lion-street The Marquis of LANSDOWNE also presented similar
IRISH MUNICIPAL BILL.
Nottingham Operative ConserVative Association in favour of
The Duke of NE WC A STL E presented a petition frein thoe,
the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill as amended by the I
the tnteterdoabsPere%taitrilra
of Lords, and praying the House to do all in its power t",
preserve Protestantism in Ireland. The Noble Duke .
e
and trusted that the House would not give way to any intimi-
dation, dation, let come from whatever quarter it might. The Noble
Duke also presented a petition from the Protestant MSOCIA
lion, held at Exeter Hall in May last, to the same eflyset.
The petition was read at length by the Clerk.
Lord STOURTON could not permit a petition like the
present to lie on their Lordships' table without raising had
against the sentiments contained. in it. He • I
not oaten troubled their Lordships with controvel sis_
discussions, but when a Noble Lord presented a petition in ,bat
House, asserting that the Roman Catholics were united with
the Dissenters to pull down the Church Establishment
which they were, to a certain degree, sworn to protect,:
( Hear, hear, hear)—he must enter his protest against that being received as embodying the sentiments of the Roman
Catholics of that country.—( Hear.) Such a charge would
represent him (Lord Stourton) as the abettor of PerierYsit
that House, a crime which would disgrace the levi-ss
uss
individual in the lowest Court of Justice, and be t
express his surprise that any Noble Lord would be found ...e,
lend himself to the presentation of a petition cont
such statements. Let the question be brought before the
House, and he (Lord Stourton) would not Shrink from the
.s
vindication of the Roman Catholic body from the calumnies
that that had been circulated against them, no matter how higiltde".
talents or eloquence that might be arranged on the other si e
No person had been sent to the House of Commons by
influence of any Priest—that he could take upon himself. ati
say. He was sure that the cause he advocated was jus:‘, and
as long as he thought so, no person should deter him :roe:roead..
ad-
vocating
vocatin that cause.
The °Earl of SHREWSBURY thought it was of little
use to admit Roman Catholics within the walls of t•;'?
House, if they were to hear nothing but their religion "i"
fled as it had been by the petition.
The Earl of WINCHIL SEA said that the Catholic reli,
gion in Ireland had been used for the worst purposes of 41-
tation.
The Earl of WICKLOW 'nod been applied to by the
tioners to advocate their claims, but if there had been ally
legation in the petition affecting the loyalty of Noble Lora'
on the other side of the House, he would candidly eon-
fess that he did not participate in that fselingn
But he thought if those Noble Lords wished to keep wset
with the country, they must make some public declaration t"a&
they had nothing to do with a certain party to whom be Pee
not further allude.
The Bishop of EXETER was glad when the Noble Earl
disclaimed any participation in that interpretation of the oat'''
which he took when he was admitted a Member of that Horse'
which would permit him to weaken or endeavour to overturn
the Protestant Church of the country. The Noble Baron
(Stourton) stated that he did riot fully participate in the Pia
of last year, and yet he had given it his support. He states_
that ho had supported it by proxy, giving his vote to the On'
stet; of the Crown. The Noble Baron in floin so bad n°
doubt been influenced by what he considfsrecl thegobvious (114
of a Minister who was sworn to rssaintain the Protestant
Church, and to be a faithful mune
ellor to his Majesty ; but
one of the Ministers of the Cro-Nri had himself admitted that
a measure which he introduced was a
couragement to the Prote-stant religion in that part of the
United Kingdom, If the. Noble Baron had heard that decla-.
grave and serious dig'
ration no doubt he wou'.d have redeemed his pledge, and vote!!
against a DM which a Minister had declared to be a grave and
senervileoirsts
Viscount
et
ondninsct oNui injure,rEa Ihs ;meatuß
tOn
always
aRt
leNs that
tEnsaidprotect.tChurch,h that
t whichhe he was
Right Revered
Prelate had gone back to a speech which he had delivered at
a period when the Noble Baron (Stourton) had full opportu-
nity to observe upon it. The Right Rev. Prelate had taken
a partial and very incorrect view of that speech in the obser-
vations which he had made on the present occasion. The
t
Right Rev. Prelate quoted one sentiment of his (Viscount Melbourne's) speech, and though he undoubtedly did think
that the measure referred to was felt as a serious blow'
to the Established Church, yet there were other reasons or
great and paramount importance which induced him to think
that the evil or inconvenience should be endured ; and he
would repeat that the Right Reverend Prelate had acted with
the greatest possible unfairness in bringing forward one sen-
timent—one point—in a speech, without stating all the guo'
eflecrattaizsatnydithpewrtheiectllly ttlriaute, speech
that a Inweanssaucrecovirnhpioe
lutely necessary that the House should adopt
mignhiheittdh.waaysehasbo‘ole
I°-35
evil consequences. In the course of the discussion on thel3illf°e
sTuemppsoer atl hi taite,s
nB
reforming the hierarchy of the Church of Ireland—the Church
no-
aille—erhtneinhaticlegrsetaerdittwheautldit
nwoats
hiemssilate
considered
a discouragement to the Protestants, and also in a certain de-
gree a triumph to the Roman Catholic party in Ireland. The
evil in that COM was certainly subordinate, but the Gove'ill'
ment was of opinion that there were other great and rOre
important considerations, which made it necessary that the
Bill should pass into a law, and that the minor inconvenieneei,
should be incurred. This was not merely the case 014
that particular measure, but the case of every great measure:
and he would take upon himself to declare, that there never
was a measure introduced into Parliament which was not at-
tended by some evil consequences.
The Earl of SHREWSBURY did not think the partsf in
another place, to which reference had been made, intendf:d t°
destroy the Protestant Establishment.
The Earl of Wl' CHILSE A explained.
The petition was then ordered to lie on the table.
THE IRISH CORPORATION BILI,
Lord LYNDHURST presented a petition rfont the town
of Rochford, in support of the Lord's ame•Aments to th.e,
Irish Corporation Bill, and, in doing so,
with this subject will your Lordships
few words? There are, as your Lor
of misrepresentation ihsyreapresspeeinakaetrir
a;ndonteheantm.,,tiesrr Pe.mit me to say a
odes
Y know, two mole
presentation of the words
applica:ion of those wont,
used, and of the argum.smts by which they are supported. The
latter mode is mere, artful. and mischievous than the former,
isrc
because it is -.let so easily detected and exposed. Such odor
of thea sense sn
whichAtasti connected
nh
neoyefetathereue
representtstions, my Lords, whether of the one description or
the other—whether proceeding from a demagogue on tho
hnatings, who not inaptly describes himself
as a Person
speaking daggers, but using none—a man whose weapons are
his words—or whether proceeding from Minister of State 'ei
the Senate, can only be considered by every honourable mind
in the highest degree reprehensible. My Lords, the tir:i°
will soon arrive when, having heard all these charges tee
.'s
preferred against me, I shall have full opportunity of answering
them, and I trust that answer will be satisfactory to your
Lordships, and expose the authors of them, whether tb°s_ess
authors profess to have heard what fell from me at the bar 0*
the House, or standing in my place here."—(Hear.) the
Viscount MELBOURNE—My Lords, I would ass,
Noble and Learned Lord whether he intends to ex?laieu,he
defend these words ; and I must say, when I cosiside
high station of the Noble Lord, and when I consider
unlit;
great abilities and his eminent qualifications, nothing weeees
give me greater o
surprise or sorrow, or deeper feelings 1, for
Bret, both for the Noble and Learned -Lord himself and ,
theh interests of the country, than the speech which I connetyo
I heard delivered by the Noble Lord on that ocoasion.
_co
Lord LYNDHURST—I beg to say that, with reference
to what has fallen from the Noble Viscount, I an' "tisthe
no explanation can be consistent—(The conclusion of
bio
rd
Noble and Learned Lord's sentence was rendered inatLdible
by the most vehement cheering.) I will say that the u. 14
Viscount, if he had attended to what I saie. never
have indulged in the observation which h 0 has now in
The Noble Viscount must have been carless in his attes tr;:.
to what I said, or he never would have thoUght proper tu i
ns
quire an explanation. This is not the time or the fitting. °t
portunity, and I am satisfied ir, the meantime to appeal
your Lordship's recollections- —( Hear, hear.)
Here the matter dropper)--
BISHOPRIC OF DURHAM BILL.
The Nierquis of LA.NSDOWNE, in moving
the fu4
esVe.sideration of the. Report on this Bill, said that a the
ofof their Lordsh;ps were of opinion that the Court of Commri
Pleas ought, to be retained, and some Noble Lords were
_us vurt
opinion that it would be desirable also to retain the u
Char.eery. With a view to facilitate any inquiries that mo_iaLe
bt
Ise necessary he should propose that the jurisdic.tion t the
counts the_
counts palatinate should be transferred from the Bishop
would
Crown. That proposition, if it were carried into effect
enable the Crown to deal with the existing Courts of Dov_ ntir"st
as it might Osinit expedient. He should, therefore,
ornu.,eand
the clause abolishing these Courts should be struck t
last
tehlacuisieisohfotphetoßthilrl b'ected to the
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY o
jbuersivsdeileatuinsen,inserted, transferring to the Crown the palatinate
body muse
nioneement of a reform in the Church, which every
deprecate. eewhyeicahrsi.iwiTtPl(tiatt,hehreetcheoi
he. should
was most fully discussed a few evenings ago,
have 8'
oci as to me'T-
Putgjohft,thvie
been entertained have thought if any doubt had
removed. The me:going of 00
The LORD CHANCELLOR
atnhde last 'clause
ing that it had been entirely
hun_
t_ _ eps.
clause was simply to declare thatto „bite
..bbrea,..p"
such re"'
pointed the revenues of the see should
so make.
of
gulations as Parliament might think IreTizil, was revenuesth ec by
Marque
After observations from L,004 ABA
LONDONDERRY, and Less\ *..fs.
your of the, lissesesvation of those Courts The Duke of
11091' *4, causkderation of the How
CA,,liA'l,4.A.L.N4k3N4PeorperteolusHre'tds
wanhicohpia:ern,eirenot.