The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-07 00:00:00

SCOTCH ENTAILS.

On the motion of the Earl of ROSEBERY, tbe En-
tailed Estates (Scotland) Amendment Bill was read a
second titre.

CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.

The Duke of ARGYLL brought in a Bill for the better
regulation cf Church Patronage in Scotland. The Noble
Lord read the details of the Bill at length, but in !,e, low a
tone that no part of them could be heard in the gallery.
The Noble Duke would not Fess the second reading of
the Bill until after the General Assembly bad had time to
consider its details.

The Earl of ABERDEEN could almost undertake to
state what the opinion of that House would he upon the
Bill of the Noble Duke. He could not but he surprised
at such a Bill proceeding from the Noble Duke. The
only fault that had ever been found with his Bill upon
the same subject was, that he had made too great conces-
sion to the dominant party in the Church. But the Bill of
the Noble Duke was neither more nor less than one to le-
galize the Veto Law, and that in a manner more odious
than the original Law of the Church. He objected to the
recognition in any Act of Parliament of " Moderating a
Call." The existence of the " Call" on the part of the
people was not recognized in any Act of Parliament that
had passed heretofore, and be objected strongly to its
being so now. By the Bill it was made compul-
sery on the Presbytery to reject the presentee if they
could not by any means reduce the dissents to less
than a majority, there was the unmitigated veto. The
second clause limited the voters to the male beads of
families in communion with the Church ; he knew one
case lately wberein there were only eight or nine heads
of families—surely that was too limited a constituency in
a pepulous parish of 2,000 inhabitants. According to the
Bill, so far from being popular election he did nra know
but what the voters might he a body pecked for the pur-
poses of election, for the clause g eve the Church power to
make rules and laws as to oho should be considered male
heady of families who should have votes. Many persons
in Scotland objected, to any minister taking the oath of
allegiance as such—The majeiity of male beads in a
parish mi,glei he of that opinion, and a presentee might be
rejected because he had taken the oath of allegiance to
her Majeety. He did not meal to speak offensively, but
anything more preposterous he had seldom seen offered to
the House, The Noble Duke said there was no desire
for the abolition of patronage. Now that he thought
was enough to make the House cautious; far the only
prayer of ell the petitions presented from Scotland was
-for the speedy and entire abolition of patronage.
The Noble Duke had given him the names
of two gentlemen who did not desire that measure—ens
was the proximate Moderator, and the other the Profeaser
that was to have been (Mr. Candlish). These were the
two gentlemen who it was said did not desire the aboli ion
of patronage ; yet a petition had been'presentedthat Session
attributing all the present evils of the Church and its diffi-
culties to patronage, and desirinee—earnestly desiring—ite
weedy told entire abolition, and it was signed by both of
tir,e3e gentlemen. Now what was to be done with such
men A great anti-patronage covenant, was entered into
and from the Central Committee in Edinburgh all these
anti.patronage petitions had emanated. There were in-
structions issued for the general getting up of these peti-
tions, and soecimene of petitions were given, as it was
stated that it seas desirable the form of the petitions should
vary, but that all should pray for the abolition of patron-
age, petitions got up in that way and carried about from
house to house could not be considered a spontaneous ema-
nation from the people. He thought that those who were
-conscientiously opposed to patronage would not be content
with the power of electing their miniocre without having
the power of dismiseing then also. This was not an agita-
tion on the part of the people, it ices purely a clerical agi-
tation. They hoped teat by declaring against patronage
they might conciliate the Dissenters; and, as a member of
the Church of Scotland, it was with indignation that
he hat read some of the appeals to the Dissenters. The
Church of Scotland never had deserved the reproaches
east upon her by her apostate sons, in these base attempts
to conciliate the support of the Dissenters to the anti-pa-
tronage.party. These gentlemen by their conduct had
deserved to meet wiih the same treatment which the Most
Reverend Father Escubae and other., his coadjutors, had
met with at the hands of Pascal. This measure would be
a moat mischievous provision, as it related to the Church
itself, and would not conciliate those who sought for the
abolition of patronage, but would merely he considered
an instalment. It was not to be borne that they should be
permitted to attempt to coerce and frighten Parliament by
these anti-pettorarpetitions. Ha trusted their Lordships
would not listen to three preposteroes claims. The clergy
bai taken up a wrong position, and,
whether etuerthey rreired
with a good grace or not, they must retire from the field.
The Earl of ROSEBERY had object to the tree-
-sure brought forward by the Nobl:! Eael last year. her-atm
be belit ved it totally inefficient to accomplish the object
he had in view, and, had it been adopted, no two Pre;bv-
teriee could have agreed as to what could be coesidered- a
just cause cf exception. The modifications preipoxed to
the veto by the measures of the Noble Duke were by no
meant so inconsiderable as nad been represented. He
considered it extremely inconvenient to discuss a Bill of
this nature before it was printed and in the hands of
Noble Lords, so as to enable thorn to become acquainted
with its provisions. He denied that the agitation on this
question was exclusively clerical ; the majority of the people
shared in their feelings; and were not that the case, it
would have been morally impossible to keep up the agita-
tion on the subject.

Lord DUNFERMLINE was anxious to arrest the pro-
gress of agitation on the subj,ct, tor he thought it would
bring upon Scotland the mot serious evil 4. He did not
think, howe,-er, that the Bill would have that result, sad
he could not in coasequence give 't his suoport. There
might be cases in which the parishes, if left uncontrolled,
might rczke proper elections. but he believed t}ac abus^s
woad gradaal2y creep into tire uiritcrn, and thdt saanda-

lons agitation would ensue. The present arrangement
for the appoi,,tment of ministers appeared to him both
wise and cquiiable, and h. did not wish to see it altered.
The Marquis of BREA D ALB ANE said that the prin-
ciples of the Scottish Church were essentially representa-
tive, and the present agitation was not confined, as seemed
to be supposed by some, to the clergy, but equally ex-
tended to the people. He approved to a great extent of
the Bill, as it made at all events a large concession to
public feeling. It did not certainly go so far as many of
the most attached and most pure-minded ministers of the
Scottish Church might desire, but he believed that so
anxious were they for a settlement of the question that
the Bill, if revised and modified, would receive their
approval and support. It had been urged that
their claims were unheard of and contrary to law ;
but on the contrary, they were perfectly con-
sistent with the practice and constitution of the Church.
He entreated the House to lay aside all prejudices, and to
consider the question on Preabvterian grounds. He en-
treated them to weigh well the deep interest the people of
Scotland took in this question, for he assured them they
would not suffer their religious principles to be trampled
upon without resistance.
The Earl of HADDINGTON concurred with his
Noble Friend that this should be considered as a Scotch
question. What, then, had the Scotch law said respect-
ing it ? It was said the present claims of the Church
would be found embodied in the law. He was surprised
to hear such a statement. In what Act could it be found ?
It was true there had been great excitement, but he be-
lieved it had much subsided, and that the people were be-
coming tired of the subject. What he complained of was
that this Bill gave the Church and the people a power they
ought not to possess, and which they would probably abuse.
He thought it was only an old friend with a new face. It
was nothing more than the old Veto Law, and was not, he
thought, at all calculated to adjust the differences which
existed on the qu-stion.
The Earl of RODEN hoped that whatever treasure
might be adopted it would be such as would allay the exist-
ing differences.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said he regretted the
ordinary course should have been departed frem with re-
spect to this Bill, by taking the discussion on the first read-
ing. He was desirous that it should not be supposed that
all approved of the measure who did not state their ob-
jections to it on the present occasion.
The Bill was then read a first time.
LEASE AND RELEASE BILL.

On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR this
Bill was read a second time.
PRIVILEGE OF PEERAGE.

On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR the
Bill for abolishing the Privilege of Peerage in cases of Fe-
lony was read a second time. The Noble and Learned
Lord said that in the time of Edward the Sixth an Act
had passed to give the Members of their Lordships' House
the same privilege in cases of felony which was then pos-
sessed by the clergy. In 1828 an Act was passed by which
the privilege of clergy in such cases was abolished, but no
provision was male with respect to the Peerage. The ob-
ject of the present Bill, therefore, was to abolish a privilege
which he was sure their Lordships would not desire to re-
tain, and to put them on the same footing in this respect
with all classes of her Majesty's subjects.—( Hear, hear.)
The House then Adjourned at a Quarter to Nine.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mir 6.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
The Coventry and Warwick Road Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Sir WTI. CLAYTON presented three petitions from
place; in Surrey against a repeal of the Corn-laws, awl
petitions from places in York, Norfolk, Buckingham, and
Glamorgan to the same effect.
Mr. GILLON presented a petitiin from Aberdeen,
praying for a repeal of the Corn laws.
Mr. BL E NNE RHA S SET T presentei petitions from
places in the county of Antrim, against lay patronage in
the Church of Scotland.

Sir G. STAUNTON presented a petition from Ports.
mouth, against the employment of dogs in drawing carts
and trucks.

Me4sengers from the Lords brought down the Drainage
of Towns Bill, and the Borough Improvements Bill, to
which the,: Lordships bad agreed wiet certain amendro,nts.
Mr. WARBURTON presented l.etitions from Cum-
berland, for the revision of thy Impost Duties; from Nor-
folk, for repeal of the Corn.laws; and from the Medical
AssociAion, in favour of Mr. Hawcs's :Medical Re.
form Bill.

Mr. B 0 U SFIE LD presented a petition from the mem-
bers of a certain Dissenting College, praying for the re-
lease of Mr. Willi im Baines, and the abolition of Church-
rates.

Mr. WODE HOUSE preiented a petition from the
Guardians of a Poor-law Union in Norfolk, against the
proposed alteration in the appointment of officers of unions.
Sir R. BATE SON presented a petition from some
place in the county of Down against ratlroad travelling on
the Lord's Day, and praying for a better observance ot the
Sabb?th ; also petitions from two Pbesbytcr;an congre.
gations in the North of Ireland, praying for the abolition
of Church patronage in Scotland.
Mr. ROUND presented petitions from thirteen pari4ies
in Essex, praying for Church Extension ; also a petition
from the Board of Guardians of the Saffron Walden
Union, praying for a more effectual remedy against the
fathers of illegitimate children.
Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from a Dissenting
Congregation of Birmingham, praying for the abolition ot
Church-rates.

Mr. E. BULLER presented a petition from some
plice in Staffordshire, praying that no grant of public
money might be toted for purposes of Church Extension.

Mr. A. MILES presented a petition from the West
India Merchants of Bristol, against any alteration in the
Sugar Duties.
Mr. BR OTH E RTO N presented a petition from a Dis-
senting Congregation at Leamington Priors, praying that
they might be permitted to make an affirmation instead of
taking an oath. Also 13 petitions praying for a repeal of
h • Corn- laws.

Mr. DIVETT presented petitions from the various
wards of the city of Exeter, praying for the abolition of
Church rftteq.

Mr. LITTON prosenteel petitions from varicus officers
of the law courts of I-eland, praying for compensation in
the event of any interference taking pl.,ce with their
offices; also, from several of the clergy of Ireland, praying
fur the restoration of the suppressed Irish Bishoprics; also,
a pe Hon from Sir Harcourt Lees, praying the House to
address her Majesty beseeching her to be graciously
pleased to issue her R.yal Proclamation, ordering the ex-
pulsion of the Jesuits from all parts of her Majesty's
dominions.

Mr. ALSTON presented a pe.ition from a Dissenting
congregation in Hertfordshire, praying for the abolition of
Church•ratee.

Mr. R. CURRIE presented five petitions from places
in the county of Northmpton, praying for the abolition
of Church-rates and Ecclesiastical Courts, and the re-
lease of Mr. William Baines.

Sir GEORGE GREY presented a petition praying
that greater facilities rn,ght be given for the admission of
Dissenting Clergymen into workhouses for the religious
consolation of those belonging tc their congregation.
Mr. F. MAULE presented numerous pet•tions praying
for the abolition of lay patron/9;e in the Church of Scotland.
Lord GEORGE LENNOX gave notice that on the
20th inst. he would move that the House should resolve
itself into a Committee in order to take into considerat'on
so much of the Report of the Naval and Military Commis-
sion as related to Marines.

Mr. LITTON grace notice ti at in Committee on the
Court of Chancery (Ireland) Bill he would move clauses
grantine compensation to certain officers.
Mr. GILLON gave notice that t3-morrow he would
move that the return of all sums of money paid to the
Church of Scotland, ordered on the 4th of March last,
be made forthwith.

Mr. WALLACE postponed I.os motion for taking into
consideration the petition of William Leckie for three cr
four weeks, at the request of several influential persons
both in and out of the House.
Mr. H. HIN DE gave notice of Ms intention to move
for a return of the manner in which the mails between
London and the North were carried._