The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-05 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS, June 4.
CALEDONIAN RAILWAY.
Lord MON I:EAGLE rose to present a petition from
the shareholders of the Caledonian Railway complaining
of the misappropriation of the funds of the company
which had been invested in speculations with other
companies by the directors. The Noble Lord inti-
mates that when the for the extension of this line
came before their Lordships h^ should ask them to r. ject
it, as he thought their Lordships ought to express their
opinion ution the conduct of these directors.
Lord BROUGHAM quite concurred in the view taken
of this matter by his Noble Friend, to whom the public
were much indebted for the watchfulness which ho dis-
played in respect to railway affairs. He (Lord
Brougham) had been taunted for not bringing in a mea-
sure on the subject of railway audit of accounts; but he
did not do so. He did not wish to take the matter out
of the hands of his Noble Friend, who was so well able
to deal with it. Ile should certainly assist his Noble
Friend to prevent the second reading of the Caledonian
Bill from passing their Lordships' House after the state-
ment thitt had been made by his Noble Fried.

After a few observations from Lord Montengle, Lord
Wharnclitre, and the Duke of Baccleuch, the conversa-
tion droppco, and the petition woo ordcred to lie on the
tAle.

Lord BROUGHAM then presented a petition, pray-
irz for en extension of the powers of the County Courts.
The Noble Lord then presented a petition front the As-
scciatcd Carpenter; of Finsbury, stating that they were
in distress, and praying for the establishment of home
colonies, and for an advance of a loan from the Treasury
to support the formation of such colonies, which they
looked upon as toe most effective means of relieving
their present distress. The Noble and Learned Lord
said that :chile he sympathised with the petitioners on
recount of their distresses, he yet could not support the
prayer of their petition, as he did not think home colo-
nies would produce the eff ct intended, nor did he think
that the Treasury had money to :Tare for the purposes
proposed by the petitioners.
The Apprehension of Deserters Bill then passed
through Committee.

Lord PORTMAN moved the second reading of the
Landlord and Tenants Bill, which came up from the
House of Commons, and where the provisions of the
Bill were fully explained.
After a few words from the Bishop of ST. ASAPH,
Lord BEAUMONT objected to the Bill, which he
believed to be an unwise measure. He begged to move
that it be read a second time that day 1-. ix months.
Lord CA MPLELL suppor:ed the principle of the Bill,
but thought it might be amended in Committee.
After a few words from the Earl of WICKLOW, their
Lordships divided, when there appeared—

ntents
Non-contents . . ... 5
Majority for the second reading... —4
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 4.

INCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
(Continued from our Third Edition of last night.)
Mr. SADLEIR had the misfortune to the a very dif
ferent view of he measure before the House from that
of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman who had
preceded him. To the principle of the Ircumbered
Estates Act of last session, as reflected in its preamble,
he had given an unqualified support, though he objected
to some of its details. His Hon. and Learned Friend took a
very narrow view of the Bill before the House. He seemed
to think in passing this Bill the House would be destroying
a vast deal of the property in Ireland; but if his Hon.
and Learned Friend had known what were the practices
of the Master's office in Ireland, he would not have
spoken as he had done in respect of its being supers. ded.
So far as the appointment of the Commissioners was
concerned, he cared not what these gentlemen might be,
provicted they were active, intelligent, business men,
who would efficiently do their duty, and whether they
did so on the principles of the Court of Chancery or no,
should they do it expeditiously, he was alike careless.
Were they to do their duty, he was, however, certain
the measure would be the means of rescuing a large
amount of the property in Ireland from the useless state
in which it now lay; as at present, the character and
conditions of sale propounded by the Court of Chancery
were the means of scaring away purchasers from those
incumbered properties, and therefore they continued
useless. He therefore supported the third reading of the
Bill, because it took up bolder ground than the Bill of
last session. But he would at the some time call atten-
tion to some defects in it, One of there was as re-
garded life-renters, and to take it out of their power to
put the Act in operatiou, as it was impossible to bring
within the compass of this Act estates so situated.
Why should not the tenant for life be empowered
to take the initiative, and sell the inheritance
for the benefit of the life-renters; and why, also, should
the creditor of the tenant for life be shut out from par-
ticipating in thief proceeds? If that were done they
would be really facilitating the sale of incumbered es-
tates in Ireland. He also thought that the powers of the
Commissioners were too limited. They had not the
power of compelling the attendance of witnesses, or the
production of deeds, except by a most circuitous route.
It would likewise produce a most salutary and beneficial
ffect in Ireland were the Commissioners empowered
immediately to expose for sale those estates which were
hung up in the Courts of Chancery and Equity in Ire-
land.—(Hear.) The most serious objection he had to
that m4sure was in consequence of the professional ab-
sentee proprietors of Ireland; and he regretted the Bill
was not so framed as to afford them an advantageous
mode of disposing of their incumbered property. It was
thought by many that it mattered not to the tenantry
whether their landlords received their rents on the banks
of the Thames or the Tagus; but he very widely differed
from them, because he believed that nothing tended
more to the peaceful, social, and religious habits of the
people than the presence and attention of their land-
lords. He, therefore, hoped that Government would
use their powerful influence to induce those absentees
to part with some of their property by some clauses
in the Bill, which would mainly tend to the advancement
of the people of Ireland. He would allude to the wot ds
of the Right lion. Member for Tamworth, in reply to
Sir J. Newport, in 1816, when he (Sir R. Peel) was
then Secretary for Ireland, and the representative of an
Irish constituency, and had therefore the means and
power of judging what would be beneficial to that
country. '6 If I were to say from what measure good
would accrue to Ireland, I would say that the compulsion
of the landlords to reside there would be better than
any proposition that could come from any other party;
for he believed that the presence of the landlords would
do more good for the preset vation of the peace and laws
of that country than any other syste m." Again, this
opinion is corroborated by that of Chi; f Justice Black-
bur nee, when a xamined before a Committee of the House
of Lords, which was to the following cfleet, that much
injury arose to the to nantry of Ireland in cense quence of
the absence of the proprietors.—(Hear.) The number of
absentee landlords was rapidly increasing, for if any of
them wished to evade the poor-law tax he had only to go
to France, spend the proceeds of his property there, and
thus escape all social and political responsibility. The en-
tire acreage of the county of Kerry amounts to 100,983
acres; of this 92,983 rcres belong to four absentees, and
half of the remaining 8,000 acres also belong to persons
not resident in that country for many years. lie, there-
fore, considered that the Government would bring for-
ward some measure this session, for it would be impos-
sible, under the two judgment acts to which he before ad-
verted, to dispose of incumbered estates in Ireland, and
if not, capitalists will never be found to purchase those
estates. He then said he would support the Bill.
Mr. HENLEY said that from the speech of the Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Sadleir), he expected that he would
move that the Bill be re-committed, but instead of that
he (Mr. Sadleir) said that he would support the third
reading of it, though all his remarks were strongly op-
posed to it. He (Mr. Sadleir) also stated that the pre-
sent measure would be as inoperative as the Bill of last
sessi,,n was; thus after cutting it up in every possible
manner, he informed the House he would support it.
He had three reasons for opposing the third reading.
One was, that there was much of the incumbered pro-
perty that should be set lcose for the benefit of Ireland,
which was not at all to be effected by this Bill, for there
was much property in that country that was without
marketable titles and prices. Another objection was,
that the Commissioners whose appointment this Bill pro-
vides for, are not to act openly and publicly, and, of
course, might to subjects, through ex-pa; to staaements
and one -sided testimony, to prejudices against those
whose interests are most involved; he therefore feared
that the Commissioners might, by a jealous and annoyed
people, become suspected of jobbing. Again, he did
not see that any national object would be gained by
taking the distribution of the funds from the proper
tribunals of the country, and placing it in the hands of
Commissioners, from whose decision and fuections
there could be no appeal. He should, therefore, op•
pose it, because he did not think it would secure its
object.
Mr. SADLEIR briefly explained that he did not sup-
port the present Bill to strengthen the Bill of last ses-
sion; for the latter he believed to be inoperative.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that he should
only refer to the leading points of the Bill. He cer-
tainly believed that the details alluded to by the Hon.
Member (Mr. Sadleir) should have been debated on in
Committee, and not on the third reading of the Bill, and
that if it were his (Mr. Sadleir's) opinion that the mea-
sure did not go far enough, that he would have the op-
portunity next session, when the Bill would be tested, in
case of a failure, to bring in his measure. Ile also con-
sidered, though contrary to the opinion of the Hen.
Member opposite (Mr. Henley), that it was confined to
incumbered estates, and should say to him and to the
Honourable and Learned Member for the University
of Dublin (Mr. Napier) with respect to the non-in-
terference of the law courts, that the Lord Chan-
cellor of Ireland expressed his full satisfaction with
the present measure, and that it did not at all
reflect incompetency on either the Court of Chancery
or the Court of Exchequer, for there were many
matters connected with Membered estates that the
Court of Chancery could not easily disentangle to the
satisfaction
appoint three
of allpersons pecrrsti enss He
oo
.ituthnoduegrshttd th
much
subject,
and to
who
and who would lay down their reasons without that
species of legal technicalities that always incumber the
sale of land.—(Hear, hear.) He always thought that
those difficulties that had been alluded to would not be
found in the working of the present measure, for there
are only two classes, the disputed and the undisputed
class; and, should any doubt at any time arise to those
three persons, they could have access to the opinions of
any of the courts they might wish to consult for the
more prompt and ready administration of their duties.
He also believed that the Bill would facilitate the means
of procuring purchasers, and that nothing would be
wanted to secure its success. The propositions con-
tained in the Bill bad met with very general approba-
tion, and there was no quarter from which any sugges-
tion had emanated to the effect that, when carried into
practice, it would not prove productive of benefit. The
Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman concluded by ac-
knowledging the assistance he had derived from an
esteemed friend of his, Mr. Golsen, in his effort to re-
vive and regenerate the rights of property in Ireland.
The House then divided, when there appeared—

For the third reading ll7
Against it l2
Majority for the Bill
The Bill Wit 9 then read a third time and passed.
The question having been put that the House should
resolve itself into a Committee of Supply,
Sir H. W. BARRON asked the Noble Lord at the
head of the Goverment whether be meant to move, on
Friday next, the Committee on the Poor Relief (Ireland)
Bill ?

Lord J. RUSSELL answered in the affirmative.
SUPPLY—MI6CELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.
The louse then resolved itself into a Committee of
Supply, Mr. BERNAL in the chair.
The following votes were agreed to:-
110,117/. for superannuation allowances and compen-
sation to persons who had been employed in the public
service.

4,1001. for the relief of American loyalists and other
charge'',

2,0001. for the National Vaccine EitabliAment.
20001. for the Refuge for the Desti'ute.
A vote of 8 900/. having been proposed for the relief
of Polish and Spanish refuge,t a,
Mr. REPTON said he thought it was time for
them to put an end to these Polish grants. He trusted
ue would be supported in his opposition to the vo:c by
those gentlemen who had of late raist,d so great a cry
throughout the country in favour of financial . refertni
olt was unnecessary for him to remind the Committee
the 1 rominent part which the Poles had taken in the
revolutionary movements on the Continent during the
last twelve months; in all those movements they he,,
been prominent and distinguished actors—(, Hear, bear
from some Honourable Member on the Ministeriatstee
of the Howe.) Hun. Gentlemen opposite might cheer
that statement; but he should remind them that there
might be a difference of opinion as to the value of the
notoriety which had thus been secured. ]fie did ne;"
however, wish to say a word against the Poles in this
country who were the recipients of that grant. 11e be;
lieved that finny of them were very excel!eut men;
self
one of them, a nobleman who had distinguished him
by his exertions for the relief of distress in the sister
country, was universally respected. But he certainly
thought that the Committee ought to insist on receiving
t
some information as to who were the recipients of
grant, and what was the mode in which it was dis.
trihuted.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that a considBrable revision of the list of the reciPirren,
of that grant had taken place since last year. I,
names of some of the parties had been struck out; °theta
had resigned; and to a third class it had been arrange,
that no relief should be given beyond the present Yes:i
The estimate of the grants to the Polish refugees
year had been 8,7001.; this year, it was 7,38014 and
the expiration of this year it would be reduced to 2,8°3t
He trusted the Committee would not withdraw the pre
posed maintenance from parties who, if they were net 4
relieved, would necessarily become chargeable to the ui
ferent parishes as casual poor.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY wished to know if vacancies
in the list were filled up ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rep
hea
•
that they were nut.

The vote was then agreed to. ot
A sum of 6,423/. having been proposed for Protesta
Dissenters, and other miscellaneous allowances, formerly
payable out of the civil list.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON said ho had
the commencement of the session that ho should opP°llo
any renewal of the reyiurn donunt. He found that when
the grant had been proposed last year a very strong fel;
position had been made to it, both out of doors ann,/,1
that House. But he was surprised to perceive IT's
during the present session the Dissenters had observed ;
complete silence upon that subject. Last year petitsil.
had been presented from most influential bodies of r
seaters against a continuance of the grant; but this yeas
there had been but one solitary petition to that eiwie
from one obscure village in Derbyshire. Under theto
given notice fite
circumstances he felt very much puzzled what course+
adopt. He believed, however, on giving his best COro'.
deration to the matter, that he should be acting in 'P
perly in opposing a grant to the dissenting body to svm.
hirs
they had themselves ceased to object.
s9sls
Mr. WYLD said he understood that the sum of 1,-
~n.
which was proposed in that vote for Protestant Piss
ters, was not the regium donum, although it was 5 Sere
for the same purpose. He believed the Dissenters %if
as much oppposed as ever to the grant, and that 111°,.° 01
reason they had not continued to petition against "s.erg
that they saw very little use in addressing their pray
40
to that House. He found by a Parliamentary ret";e4
that the sum voted under this head, and distribude,
amongst the clergymen of three denominations-n.lllOO
pentlents, Presbyterians, and Baptists, did not give °oh
than 225. for each. What substantial relief could 0.„
assistance afford? The Dissenters of England rePol
dieted the grant, over which they had no control, 114
he hoped the Noble Lord at the head of the Governtneoc%
if he would not consent to abandon it on the presentais,
casion, would give a pledge that this insult to the aid
renting body would be discontinued. If not, he s"°
feel compelled to divide the Committee. Age of
Lord J. RUSSELL could certainly give no Pies'," eie
the kind. So far from this grant being forced yellore
Dissenters, the applications for assistance from it wing
numerous, and it was distributed by Dr. Rees and es: bed
of great respectability as a matter of charity. 1"; of
been given ever since the time of George I.; first olio;
the civil list, and subsequently by Parliament-
tot
could not, therefore, give any promise that the g
would be withdrawn.
Mr. B. SMITH wished to know whether the °tb°s
vernmerst had any objection to furnish a list of
recipients ? Iserti
Mr. WYLD expressed his regret that the Noble fors
should persevere in refusing to remove this stigma the
the dissenting body, who had always regarded d ;he
Noble Lord with the most sincere respect. Celli Ott
Noble Lord point to a single dissenting congreP re•
which would acknowledge that any of its ininittereolf
ceivcd relief from this grant? The recipients vvtre sto
to be found anssng the three classes of Dissenterem
which he had referred. The Wesleyans did not ree
one farthing of it.
Mr. BRIGHT said that nothing could be more erbr:;
neous than the inference that because no petifollsterg
been presented, therefore the opinions of the Dissembsa
had relaxed on the subji et of the grant. They nola
made a considerable effort last year, and probably 11,:d so
make another two or three years hence." With rega'blii
furnishing the names of the recipients, he thetigssliti
most unconstitutional that thousands of the PIO
money should be distributed amongst persons of 5.
they knew nothing. Until the names were farms"see
he for one would never believe that a thousand Diskeile
ing ministers 101 l received relief from this source• abo
could promise the Noble Lord that the first list weelet
the last; for either the parties would be deterred frig,
spoiling again by the force of public opinion, or the
seining bonies to which they belonged would teak
whatever might be necessary to maintain them in
dependent and honourable position. sot°
Mr. W. J. FOX said this was perhaps the enloci:
in the estimates which was opposed by its noteinu`„ts I,'
pirnts. the money must be granted, at all eve'nvuo
ought to be placed in the hands of those who rePres;-0 be'
the dissenting bodies for whose benefit it professeu, oto
The present mode of distribution was peculiarly 1;0;
abuse, of which instances were within his otv",.erriOli
ledge. It was at all times made the means of coning 00.
undue influence on certain individuals, and wisese-
frequently used for the promotion of political enuires all
sides this, it was a violation of a principle to v‘"l groPr
dissenters were firmly attached—namely, that 11°
on
of public money ought to be made for the promo°
any particular system of theology. eS to
Mr. KERSHAW said he had taken some fag olio'
ascertain the parties amongst whom this grant pan
tributcd, but without success; and the conclusls„ isee
therefore forced upon him that it must either bet og ,
to
to unworthy objects, or to individuals not belagtsie
the dissenting ministry at all. With regard to
legcd alteration in the feelings of the dissenters, Peci her
that since last year very strong resolutions b
r
passed by those bodies against the grant. ight At.'
Lord J. RUSSELL certainly did not think it ' y
give the names of those amongst whom the Webeer
for
distributed; for he agreed with the Hon. Wield bes-
Manchester in thinking that to publish them sveu",, rePs:
put a speedy end to the list. It would be the orig-ife7
persons of any denomination to wham alms wereou 5";
If to any of these it were said--"I will give Y
but I will publish your name in the votes of this Joie;
of Commons," who would accept the boon? Ilerriees
that the distribution of the money was made stwehlisbil
to political purposes, or for the purpose of estaAvies
any sort of connexion between the dissenting b°",,eitO
the state, or, indeed, for any objects whatever ,
those of harity.
Mr. BRIGHT still objected to this bens pail° fn
of system, under which no one could tell how
was distributed. The Noble Lord said it wouset Pa
seemedpit- to exposthee
get t partieshat he
e wwahs onpotardtiecipliantedwigio-0111,
money, but with that of the public. —(hear, heeer.Y4:l
the Noble Lord chose to give 51. to the Church 00",
land, or any other church,every day, he had no oklieog 11
to it; but lie had the greatest objection to his test- f"
from those funds of which the Chancellor of tw"were
chequer was the trustee for the nation, and whichav O
with difficulty raised by taxes on the consinne` io
whom they often pressed with great inequality ti-t,14
er
justice. If tho Noble Lord was as much a 13Wiserl bero
he used to be—(Laughter)—he believed the No" ;eat,
used to attend a dissenting chapel until Hon. Getil 8,10
opposite put a stop to it— (Cheers and laughter
oE
Noble Lord knew us well as he (Mr. Bright) rod
feeling of Dissenters, he would be aware that ti g
this kind was not in accordance with their policf•
The Committee divided, when there appeared
For the vote
For the amendment 3319
Majority
The vote was then agreed to, as were also-
-1,0001. for the Dublin Fever Hospital.
12,093/. for the House of Industry, Dublitr. 4101 fir
On the vote of HOZ for the Female Orphan JleJ;
Mr. FAGAN complained that the vote was t; hilt
distributed among the female orphan children 0' teS
The children received in the asylum were edueeborlfh9;
elusively in the Established religion, and when , to the;
of the Roman Catholic religion were brought lilisr;
institution, he knew that they were brought uPstal /If
religion of the Established Church. He contend gik;
the Roman Catholic population were entitled te (!da 111,1
in the grant, and he should feel it his duty to divifti_d°
Committee on the grant, unless his Right Ilev'atifvto
the Secretary for Ireland would give him some 3sicifil
that the Catholic orphans of Ire land would Par
in the grant:
d
Sir %V. SOMERVILLE admitted that the o
oteol 0,
of an exclusive character. It had been voted forAucticii
long time, and was in the course of annual de•:nue
and it would be a great hardship to discouti
suddenly. ot fitjro
Major BLACKALL said the institution was /lob •
pored exclusively by a grant from the Govern° 0;
the re was a large sum subscribed for its supporta' old fig
Mr. FAGAN hoped some hope would be 'De P'
that the grant would be increased in the WO dr
suggested. g b01).00
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQU uallY
on the c, nicely, that the vote vvou'd be one

The vote a as then agreed to, as were also--
2,2501. for the Lock Hospital, Dublin.
800/. for the Lying-in Hospital.
1,500/-for Steven's Hospital, Dublin.
3,8001. for the Cork street Fever Hospital.
5004 for the Hospital of Incurables. Secealr°
On the vote of 37,1831. to non-conforraing, • a
and Protestant dissenting rdnisters in Ireland,
_ea tb
Mr. TRELAWNY said if the House sanctir_, eeln
vote, they ought to go a step further and pal gi°-
of Ireland. The vote was clearly not one of
oral PS'
principles; but it was a question whether it WojegiOn
be advisable-to wake sorne.effort to_secureLtbe OOP
of the, priests, as the friends of order in Itellg"

big them in the same way that other Dissenting clergy-
men were paid.
The vote was then agreed to.
7,0961. fur chariittUe allowance charged on the Conso-
lidated Fund.
Mr. F. FRENCH observed that two boards of health
were charged fur, one of which must certainly be useless.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said one of those boards was
permanent, and the ether only of a temporary character,
arising from the spread of disease during the last two or
three years in Ireland.
On the vote of 14,6521. to defray the expense of the
General Board of Health,
Mr. HENLEY suggested that it would be better to
wait until the money had been actually expended, and
then submit a vote in the civil contingencies to defray
the actual expense that bad been incurred, rather than
thus loosely beforehand take a vote on account in the
estimates.
Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER de-
fendcal the present as the more proper course, as it was
perfectly in accordance with the sound rule on which he
acted to submit all estimates of the public expenditure to
the House of Commons.
The vote was agreed to.
On the vote 2 4471. for salaries and incidental expenses
of the Central Board of Health in Dublin,
Sir W. SOMERVILLE stated, in reply to Mr. Gro-
gan, that there was great difficulty in applying the pro •
visions of an Act for sanitary purposes in Ireland, owing
to the extreme poverty of the people, which furnished no
means whatever for executing sanitary regulations. The
subject, however, was under consideration, and he was
not without the hope that, during the present session, a
sanitary measure of general application for Ireland would
be passed.
The vote was agreed to, as also were the following:-
18,0001. cost of certain works of navigation connected
with drainer in Ireland.
8381., repairs of the British Ambassador's house at
Paris.
On the vote, 12,0001. towards defraying the expense
of rebuilding the British Ambassador's house at Con-
stantinople.
Lord PALMERSTON, in reply to Sir H. Wil-
loughby, said the cost of the building would be about
40,0001. The great expense was caused by the diffi-
culty of getting stone, the houses there being generally
built of wood. The necessity for building a house for
our Ambassador at present in Constantinople, aresa
from the former embassy having been burnt down in
one of the great fires that had taken place there some
time past.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said there would be no end
to the expense unless the Government looked carefully
to it, and it was, therefore, that he directed attention to
the matter.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the most stringent orders had been given on that
bead, and to enforce it an architect had been sent out to
Constantinople.'
The vote was agreed to.
16,0001. to defray the expense of militia and volunteers
in Canada.
Mr. V. SMITH inquired if the Government had taken
measures to throw that which was a peculiarly colonial
expense upon the colony?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that a year ago an intimation had been conveyed to the
People of Canada that that expense, which had been paid
under an arrangement with the Government of the day,
would not be continued beyond a certain period from that
time. The period then fixed was the 30. h of April next
year, when the payment would cease.
The vote was agreed to; as also were the following,
without discussion:-
7,300 t.. for lighthouses abroad.
3,0001. for harbour at Lybster—a place of refuge for
fishing boats on the east coast of Scotland.
448,0001. for charges and expenses of the commis-
sariat; and
• 43,8721. for charge of halt pay, pensions, and allow-
ances of commissariat officers.
Mr. V. SMITH said that he saw no vote this year for
the commission on criminal law; he wished, therefore,
to know whether the Commission was finally closed.
Sir G. GREY said the Commission had virtually ex-
Pirf'd, as one of the Commissioners was dead, and there
Would be no further application to Parliament for any
Vote on account of it. The Commission bad drawn up
one further report on criminal procedure, which would
be presented to Parliament.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and asked
leave to sit again.
SUPPLY.—REPORT.

The report of_ the Committee of Supply on the mis.
cellaneous estimates was then brought up and read.
On the vote of 3,5401. for tho expenses of the eccle-
siastical Commission being recited,
Mr. V. SMITH objected to the principle of the vote.
The business of the Commission was confined to the
management of ecclesiastical property, and he was there
fore of opinion the expense should he borne out of eccle-
siastical funds, and not by the public. In the year 1844
that principle was partly admitted, and since then the
proportion of the expense borne by the Commission was
as 1 to 3. He (Mr. Smith) thought the public should
not be called on any longer to.pay any portion of the
expense, especially as many persons would have to
be taxed who were conscientiously opposed to the
Church establishment.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the reasons for the vote had
been given several times; in fact, the question had been
several years under the consideration of Parliament.
The late Archbishop of Canterbury had stated to him
(Lord J. Russell) the reasons for this vote. He (Lord
J. Russell had potnted to Queen Anne's Bounty as an
analogous case, the expense of which was defrayed out of
the fund itself. Bat the archbishop said, and said rightly,
that a hen that fund was created, monies belonging to the
Crown had been surrendered to the Church, and there..
fume the Church could aff,rd to pay the expenses of its
management; but in this case there was no proposition to
augment the property of the Church, only to distribute
it in such a manner as was deemed the best for the reli-
gious instruction of the lay community; and therefore it
was but just that the public, for whose benefit the dis-
tributien was made, and not the Church, should bear the
charge of that distribution. As the case stood, the
reduction proposed would be pro !Pito a reduction on
the amount appropriated to religious instruction, and a
consequent diminution of ecclesiastical efficiency. He
did think, however, that if, at a future period, the funds
of the Church should very considerably increase, owing
to title prudent management of ecclesiastical property,
and that a large sum should be at the disposal of the
Commission, it might be right to place the greater part,
if not the whole of the expenses of the Commission on
the funds of the Church.
Mr. HENLEY said that the outcry formerly was to
rob the bishops, and deans and chapters, of the property,
under ,the pretence of church extension; the outcry now
Was to make the Church pay for the distribution of the
plunder. It was an act ostensibly performed for the
Weal of the public, and the public had, therefore, no
reason to complain if it was charged a small sum for the
expense of distributing the spoil.
Mr. V. SMITH consented to withdraw his motion for
the omission of the vote.
The vote was thin agreed to.
On the recital of the vote of 125,0001. for public educa-
tion in Great Britain,
Mr. E WART said that ho had before expressed his
hope that the public would be made acquainted with the
mode in which the sums that were annually voted for
the promotion of science, art, and education, had been
expended. The House was regularly furnished with
a statement with regard to the estimates of the
navy, the army, and the ordnance; and he did
not see why it should not also have a statement
upon the important subject of education, and of the ex-
penditure of all sums which were voted for that purpose,
and for the promotion of art, science, and literature. He
trusted that another year would not be permitted to
elapse without such a statement as he had alluded to
being made to the House.
Sir G. GREY said he had prepared a statement which
would give the expenditure, the number of schools, and
the number of teachers who received stipends; but it
was, in fact, only an abridgment of the information al-
ready laid before Parliament, and which was contained
in the minutes of the Council of Education. The Right
Hon. Baronet then read the statement, the greater part
of which was, however, inaudible in the gallery.
Amongst the items were sums for the erection of 188
training schools, and the supply of 164 of them with
books, the grants made by the Council to the British and
Foreign Schools Society, and the schools connected with
the Established Church of Scctland ; 3,7501. towards the
expense of training schools; and 1,5001. in aid of ragged
schools.
On the vote of 1,500/ for the National Gallery, pur-
chase of pictures, and expenses of the gallery, being read,
Mr. V. SMITH drew the attention of the House to
the circumstance that the Vernon collection of paintings
had been placed in a cellar, a position, he observed, in
which it was a national disgrace to leave them. He
wished to be informed if the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer had it in contemplation to provide any better ac-
commodation of the exhibition of these valuable works
of art?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he
quite agreed with his Right Hon. Friend that it was a
most desirable object to provide better accommodation
for this collection of pictures, and the only reason for
its not having been done was, that it would involve, in
some shape or other, a considerable outlay, which he did
not feel that he should be justified in proposing in the
present year.
The remaining resolutions having been passed, the
report was brought up and agreed to.
The Pupils' Protection (Scotland) Bill was read
second time.
The Sheepatealers (Ireland) Bill was read a second
time.

AUSTRALIAN COLONIES.
Mr. HAWES brought forward his amended Bill for
the better government of the Australian colonies
consideration of the House. It was not his intent:
ft(irrit the
i)
occupy the House at any great length :with the
of the Bill, but he might state that it was framed to
meet the wishes of the colonists, and upon the b]sis of
the constitution at present existing in New South Wales,
which consisted of Governor and Legislative Council,
composed of members elected in the proportion of one-
third by the Goverto two-thirds by the colonists.
The Governor of thirFilony, chose twelve of the Le-
gisl4tive Council and twenty-four other Members were
chosen by the people at large. After much considera-
tion, it was resolved to adopt this model, atul the main
object of the Bill was to carry that constitution into
effect. The first object was to make Port Philip a sepa-
rate Government, to be called Victoria. All the other
colonies were to be placed upon the 'footing of New
South Wales. Another object was to establish a kind
of federal union of all the colonies for certain
general purposes. The colonists would elect certain mem •
bers to a general assembly of the whole Union, whoso
functions were detailed in the Bill. Their functions
would extend to matters of what might be called impe-
rial importance. They would have the establishment
Of supreme court. The regulation of toads, highways,