The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-14 00:00:00

After a few words in explanation from Mr. HORS-
MAN,

Mr. BROTHERTON said that he could not support
the amendment of his Honourable Friend, but still
he thought that he was not wrong in saying
that this Bill was not acceptable to many of his
constituents. The great objection to the Bill was the
great increase to the power of the hierarchy by the crea-
tion of these additional bishops. All classes nearly in
Manchester and the neighbourhood were against this
Bill, and the principal objection to it was that the power
of the Church would be so much increased that the civil
and religious liberty of the subject would be in a certai❑
degree infringed. He thought, however, that the amend-
ment acted in a very indirect way, and that the better
course would be to move that it be read this day three
months. He did not feel called upon to make such a
motion, but if any other Hon. Member moved it, he
should feel bound to support it.
Mr. ENTWISLE said that it was impossible that
the Bishop of Chester could perform the very extensive
duties which devolvedtpon him, and therefore it was
that the present measure was proposed. He thought,
however, that the question principally rested upon the
clause which excluded the bishop to be appointed from
his seat in the House of Lords. That question would
be better discussed in Committee upon the Bill, and
therefore he should support the motion fur the second
reading.
Mr. HUME said that he strongly objected to the prin-
ciple of this Bill, and he should take the sense of the
Ilouse on it. Such a measure would be a violation of the
agreement made with the Church in 1835-6. He thought
that those who supported measures like the present
were not friends to the Church, especially when they
remembered that at present there were between 4,000
and 5,000 livings which were under 2001. a year, and
the holders of them prevented from doing those duties
which they ought to do, as pastors and clergymen, by
the number of souls under their care. The property of
the State, instead of being applied to the support of these
pastors, whose duties were so onerous, was given
to those who did not perform one-half of the
works which these clergymen performed. He thought
that no clergyma❑ ought to have under 3001. per
annum, and that he ought to reside upon the scene
of his duties, in order that he might be enabled to
perform them well and efficiently. He thought that
the Right Hon. Gentleman and the Noble Lord had
yielded to the clamour of a few clergymen instead of
the voice of the Church and the people. He should,
upon these considerations, as soon as this amendment
was disposed of, move that this Bill be read that day
three months.

Viscount CLIVE thanked the Noble Lord and the
Government for the course which they had pursued on
that occasion. If the Church were to be made more
efficient they must have more bishops.
Mr. lIINDLEY asked what effect the Bill would have
upon the Ecclesiastical Court of the district.

Lord J. RUSSELL said it would produce no change.
Mr. AGLIONBY recommended the House to divide
on the amendment, and not on the Bill itself, because it
was quite clear that the House was not in possession of
sufficient information to come to a proper decision.
Lord SANDON supported the measure on the ground
that it was a step in the right direction.
The amendment was then withdrawn.
Mr. HUME then moved that the Bill be read a second
time that day three months.
Mr. WAKLEY seconded the amendment, because he
entertained the greatest possible objection to the Bili.
Dr. NICHOLL supported the second reading of the
Bill, but he must at the same time express his regret
that the suggestions of the Ecclesiastical Commission
upon this subject had not been adopted.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE objected to the principle of
this measure altogether, and contended that it was an
indirect violation of the compact come to in 1836 between
the Government and the Liberal Members of that
House. Who was it wanted these bishops? He had
heard of no petition in favour of the Bill, and so far as
the opinion of the Ecclesiastical Commission was con
cerned, he thought that all they knew of that board
showed it was not entitled to public confidence.
Lord J. RUSSELL denied that there was any compact
come to on this subject in 1836, and therefore there
could be no breach of faith committed by the intro-
duction of this Bill.

Mr. DENISON did not think that he would be justi-
fied in taking that opportunity of discussing the pro-
ceedings of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners; but he
would say this much, that the House had done perfectly
right in appointing a Committee of Inquiry into them.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading
Against it
Majority —lo9
The Bill was then read a seoond time, and ordered to
be committed on Thursday next.
THAMES CONSERVANCY BILL.

In answer to a question from Mr. HUME,
Mr. WARD said it was the intention of Governmen
to withdraw this Bill.

The order of the day for the committal of the B
was then read, for the purpose of being discharged.
The House then adjourned till Five o'clock.

The House resumed at Five o'clock. 0
GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (BERMS AND
HANTS EXTENSION).
On the motion for the further consideration of the re-
port upon this Bill,
Mr. WAKLEY, in the absence of Mr. B. Cabbell, moved
for copies of the memorial, and of the papers and sections
annexed thereto, from the inhabitants of the town of
Devizes and its neighbourhood, to the Right lion.
Lord John Russell, M.P., as the First Lord of the
Treasury, and to the other Right Honourable Mem-
bers of her Majesty's Government, relative to and
for the placing of the town of Devizes on the main
line of the Great Western Railway (Extension of the
Berks and Hants Railway from Hungerford to West-
bury, with a Branch to Devizes), presented in February
last to their Lordships, fur consideration and redress,
by Mr. Ludlow Bruges, M.P., through the Right Ho-
nourable the Commissioners of Railways : also, of
the several names or signatures of the memo-
rialists, and their respective residences and descrip-
tions signed to and appearing on such memorial: also,
copy of the letter afterwards written and sent by Mr.
Ludlow Bruges, M.P, to their Lordships in reference
thereto ; and also, of their Lordships' letter, dated on
or about the Bth of March last by their secretary, Mr.
C. E. Trevelyan, to Mr. Ludlow Bruges, in
answer thereto, in order that the facts and matter
stated in such memorial of the inhabitants of Devizes,
and the prayer of such memorial, shall be
submitted to the consideration of the House at the same
time when the report of the Commitec on Group 6, on
the Great Western Railway (Extension of the Berks and
Hants Railway from Hungerford to Westbury with a
Branch to Devizes), shall be submitted to the conside-
ration of the House. And to move thereupon, that
the consideration of such report of the Committee
on Group 6, now standing for consideration of the House
to-morrow, shall be postponed for consideration until
the day after such memorial shall have been printed
with the votes.

The motion was seconded by an HoN. MEMBER.
➢lr. WRIGHTSON hoped that the Hou.te would no
agree with the motion.

-After a few worth from Lord VILLIERS and Mr.
STRUTT,
The motion was withdrawn, and the further considers•
tion of the report agreed to.
THE BANK CHARTER.

Mr. T. BARING presented a petition, most numer•
ously and respectably signed by the bankers, merchants,
and traders of the City of London, :attributing the great
monetary distress by which the country had lately been
afflicted to the action of the Bank Charter Act.—(Loud
cheers.) He would not recapitulate the words of the
petition, which concluded by suggesting, as a remedy,
that a relaxing power should, under certain emergencies,
be entrusted to the executive government, and that the
Bank of England should have the power of issuing notes
on silver bullion. The petition was signed by men of
all political parties, who were most anxious to guard
against the possibility of this being made a matter of
party struggle ; and it was for this reason that he had
abstained from moving that it should be printed with
ht e
Them Vtpooe
ttf
ieotsui ,onwndehraie
s motion ,
a 1 s
3e s
tuant
uponde
de r
its
that
oa ot d,
during w
unlessotuhl have
ed
vs
roems
ee n
modifica-
tion se spledgedsi
on
were introduced into the Bank Charter Act they
apprehended equal, if not greater distress.
TRANSPORTATION TO AUSTRALIA.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition signed by
7,000 inhabitants of Sydney, New South Wales, against
the future transportation of convicts to Australia.

MESSAGE FROM TIIE LORDS.

Messengers from the Lords brought up several Bills,
which wero respectively read a first time.
SUNDERLAND IMPROVEMENT BILL.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved the second reading o
this Bill.

Mr. LIDDELL resisted the motion, and moved
as an amendment that it be read a second time
that day three months. It was impossible to carry
the Bill through all its stages during the present session,
and it therefore ought to be postponed.
Mr. BARELY and Mr. T. DUNCOMBE opposed the
amendment, and atter a short discussion the motion for
the second reading was withdrawn.
Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE moved for returns
containing the names of all persons to whom pensions
have been granted since the establishment of the
separate fund of 1,2001. for the reward of scientific,
literary, and other civil services; specifying the ground;
upon which such pensions have been granted: and, of all
pensions granted as above, which have fallen in, showing
whether by death or resignation of the recipients.
Agreed to.