The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-21 00:00:00

Vittrb latittion

THE SIJN,I

have seats in the new Parliament—(Laughter)—but if
he should not appear in the House again, he should
look back with credit to the exertions he had made to
prevent the addition of another bishop to the overgorged
Church Establishment.—(aughter.)
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment l4
Against it
Majority
On the question that the Bill be read a third time,
Mr. P. BORTHWICK moved the omission of so much
of so much of clause 2 as enacts the exclusion, in rota-
tion, of the future bishops of certain existing sees from
seats in the House of Lords.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL would not repeat the argu-
ments which he urged yesterday against the motion of
the Hon. Gentleman, and he hoped that after the ex-
pression of opinion that had been given by the House in
favour of the Bill he would withdraw his motion.
Mr. LAW supported the amendment.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK would not divide the House
upon the motion, and it was by leave withdrawn.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' BILL.
The report on this Bill was brought up.
LONDON BRIDGE APPROACHES' FUND BILL.
The Lords' Amendments in this Bill were considered
and agreed to.
LEITH HARBOUR AND DOCKS DUES BILL.
The Lords' Amendments on this Bill were considered
and agreed to.
COMMUTED ALLOWANCES FOR PENSIONS.
Sir DE LACY EVANS moved for copies of such
orders, warrants, or directions as may have been issued
by the War-office or Treasury, bearing date about the
year 1832, inviting or authorising pensioners to receive
a commuted allowance for their pensions
with the promise of land in the colonies; of such un-
published representations to Government as may have
been made by the Earl of Durham while Governor of
Canada, on the consequences of these commutations; of
such orders or explanations as may have been issued
by the English Treasury or War-office to the Ca-
nadian Government or otherwise, on the subject of
restoring the pensions of the pensioners in Ca-
nada under certain specified circumstances ; of such
minutes or orders as may have been drawn up by the
Treasury, showing why the measure of restoration of
pension extended to the pensioners in Canada, ought
not to be granted to the commuted pensioners who may
not have left England, or who may have returned to
England from Canada. Also, of such representations
as may have been addressed to the Treasury subse-
quent to 1832, by the Right Honourable Edward Ellice
and the Right Honourable Sir Henry Hardinge, when
Secretaries at War, in reference to the justice or policy
of commuting pensions for service or wounds, and to the
case of those who claimed restoration of their pensions,
after having, in fact, paid back with interest, the amount
which had been advanced to them as a commutation by
Government.
Mr. HUME seconded the motion.
Mr. FOX MAULE did not consider he would be jus-
tified in producing the papers, and he should therefore
oppose the motion.
The motion was then withdrawn.
RAILWAYS AND THE DUCHY OF LAN-
CASTER.
Mr. HUDSON inquired of Lord John Russell, whe-
ther it has the sanction of the Government that the
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster may insist, in
case of any railway requiring any of the Duchy's land,
that the railway before receiving the consent of the
Government, shall be obliged to agree to pay such a price
for the land as he may think right to demand, and take
such securities as the Chancellor may determine to
require them to give.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was impossible for
him to state the grounds which induced his Noble Friend
the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to refuse the
land in a particular case, and, without inquiry, he could
give no reply to the question of the Hon. Gentleman.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, it was agreed
that the House, at its rising, should adjourn till one
o'clock to-morrow.
NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Mr. H. R. YORKE moved for copies of all coares-
pondence entered into between the Commissioners of
her Majesty's Woods, &c., the architect, and Dr. D. B.
Reid, since September, 1846, whether referring to the
new House of Commons in particular, including also all
special letters between the Chief Commissioners and Dr.
Reid, or between the Secretary to the Chief Commis-
sioner and Dr. Reid, since Sept., 1846. Of the original
notes of evidence taken by Mr. P. Hardwicke during the
progress of the reference appointed by the Viscount
Canning, when the referees decided that they would not
have reporters present. Of the answer transmitted by
Dr. Reid to a document issued by the Commissioners of
her Majesty's Woods, on the 2d day of December, 1845,
and in juxta position with it; the "objections by Dr.
Reid," that appear in p. 46 of the Minutes of Evidence laid
before the Select Committee on Westminster-bridge and
New Palace. And a paper dated the 19th day of April,
1845, and titled Minutes of Conversation,' which was
transmitted by the architect to ,the Commissioners of
her Majesty's Woods, and Dr. Reid's reply thereto, viz.,
his letter addressed to the Commissioners of her
Majesty's Woods, and dated the 30th day of June, 1845.

SUPPLEMENT TO THE “LONDON

GAZETTE " OF TUESDAY.

PALACE OF WESTMINSTER, LORD GREAT
CHAMBERLAIN'S-OFFICE, JULY 21, 1847.
All Peeresses, on announcing their intention of being
present on the occasion of the prorogation of Parlia-
ment, will have places reserved for them in the House of
Lords, if the announcement be made at the Lord Great
Chamberlain's Office before five o'clock on Thursday,
the 22d instant.
Peers' eldest sons, wishing to be present at the proro-
gation, will have tickets for the Peers' eldest sons' box
forwarded to them, upon a written or personal applica-
tion at the Office.
No strangers can be admitted, on the day of the pro-
rogation, except by a ticket from the Lord Great Cham-
berlain's Office.
The doors will be opened at twelve o'clock.
WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBY, G.C.

PALACE OF WESTMINSTER, LORD GREAT
CHAMBERLAIN'S OFFICE, JULY 20, 1847.

Notice is hereby given, that, in consequence of the
approaching prorogation of Parliament, and the imme-
diate resumption of the works for the completion of the
House of Lords, the weekly issue of tickets from the
Lord Great Chamberlain's Office, for viewing the House
of Lord 9, will be for the preEent discontinued.
WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBY, G.C.

REGISTRY of BIRTHS and DEATHS
DURING THE WEEK ENDING JULY 17.
Deaths registered in the week. Births registered in the week.
Males ... ... ... 479 Males ... ... ... 600
Females ... ... 465 Females ... ... 582
. . 944

Total

Total ... 1,182

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
The House re-assembled at Half-past Four o'clock.
The Earl of SHAFTESBLRY took his seat on the Woo
sack, in the absence of the Lord Chancellor.
NEW PEERAGE. _

The Marquis of Drogheda was introduced by the
Marquis of Cholmondely, the Earl of Redesdale, and
Lord Wharncliffe, and took the oaths and his seat as
Baron Moore.
The House then adjourned till to-morrow at a Quarter
before One o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he would abstain from
again going over the arguments which he bad already
urged upon the subject of the union of the sees of Bangor
and St. Asapb, but he would at once address himself to
the ground upon which the Right Hon. Gentleman
founded his opposition to the third reading of this Bill—
namely, the temporary exclusion of the Bishop of
Manchester from a seat in the House of Lords.—(Hear.)

The Right Hon. Baronet thought that there was great
danger from the expulsion of one of the bishops from
the House of Lords, and founded his opinion upon
statements made in this House, while he altogether
overlooked the fact that the bishops in the tipper
House had a full opportunity, it they thought
proper, to express their opinions upon the subject. The
Right Hon. Baronet set aside all this silence upon the
part of the bishops, and said that he attached great
weight to the statements of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Bath and the Hon. Member for Kerry; but
he (Lord John Russell) did not think that that Hon.
Member bad even recorded his vote on the subject, so
little insight did he appear to attach to
his own opinion on the subject.—(Hear, hear.)
He did not wish again to enter into the question of the
rotation of the bishops ; he did not see any danger real
or theoretical in the proposition. He thought it would
be of some advantage to the bishops if instead of their
having to spend the first portion of their time, after their
appointment, in London in attendance on their duties in
the House of Lords, they had the opportunity afforded
them of becoming acquainted with the duties of their
dioceses. Such an opportunity would have, no doubt,
been of great service to the last created bishop—the
Bishop of St. Asaph. With respect to the grievous di-
visions of the Church, he would only say that it was his
most earnest wish to see the Protestant character of the
Church of England fully and entirely maintained.
Mr. S. WORTLEY felt it incumbent on him, not-

withstanding the support which he had formerly given to
the Bill in its other stages, to join in the opposition to
the Bill in the present stage. Ilia reason for opposing
the Bill was because of the retention in the B;11 of a
clause for excluding the new bishop from a seat in the
House of Lords, a principle which he considered to be
utterly subversive of the constitution of the country. If
this measure were to pass, the responsibility of dealing
that severe blow to the Church would not rest so much
with the Noble Lord at the head of the Government,
but with those Hon. Members on his side of the House
who had uniformly given their support to the interests
of the Church.

Sir R. H. INGLIS regretted the omission of such
words from the Bill as the Government had thought
proper to omit; but even the Bill in its present shape,
mutilated as it was, was such as in his opinion was
deserving of his support, and he could not therefore
concur in the opinion of those Hon. Members who had
considered it advisable to reject the measure in its pre-
sent stage.
Mr. HOPE thought, that as the Roman Catholic
episcopate had been increased from six bishops to ten to
superintend its few hundreds of thousands of members,
surely the Protestant Church of England, with its mil-
lions of members, ought:to have a corresponding increase
in the number of its bishops.
Mr. HORSMAN regretted that the discussion upon
this measure had been more upon the ground of the
wants of the episcopacy than of the serious existing
wants in the parochial system of the country. He
hoped to hear from the throne on the opening
of the next session that her Majesty had taken
into her most serious consideration the wants
of the country in that respect. With respect to the
welfare of the Church, it would be highly conducive to
its interests if the existing :system of patronage were
reviewed and remodelled. The subject of church-rates
was also one which deserved the serious consideration of
the Government, with a view to removing the dissensions
which constantly arose out of the present mode of levy-
ing them.
Lord H. VANE supported the Bill, but could not
help stating, at the same time, that he should have pre-
ferred a union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.
He considered the doctrine preposterous that the increased
revenues of the different sees—of London for instance—
should be devoted to the creation of colonial bishoprics.
He wished to have the revenues of the Church solely
devoted to the purposes of the Church. The expulsion
of the new bishop, and of the other three referred to, from
the; House of Lords would cause much bitterness, ani-
mosity, and jealousy. The Bill in its present shape,
however, was preferable to the state in which it was
ori-
ginally brought in.
Mr. GOULBURN should support the third reading
of the Bill, as he considered it would be a great step
towards promoting and extending the religion of their
forefathers. He deduced from the statement of the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham), with respect
to a near and dear friend of his (Mr. Goulburn's), the
Bishop of Carlisle, that a bishop with an extensive dio-
cese, and a limited number of clergy, could discharge all
the duties of his sacred office effectually. The labours
of that Right Rev. Prelate were an example to all others.
If his diocese were to be increased, as he understood, the
harmony which prevailed in his present diocese would
doubtless be extended to the increased portion. He
thought no one could doubt that a Bishop of Manchester
was absolutely required, and he contended that the
Government would have done well to have conceded
that new bishop a seat in the House of Lords.—(Hear.)
denied that the Dissenters had obtained in-
creasoZ
did not thinkow t
er in the administration of religion, but he
that they
really objected to another bishop
representing
a lame dioceseo taking h.is seat with his
compeers in the House
of Lords.
had
that the Noble Lords. He r egretted, there-
fore,Lintention of allowing the Bishop a
opboafndmoanielcdhelesitseorraigsienaatl
in the other House.
Mr. B. ESCOTT adverteol to his arguments against
the Bill, and advised the Government not to introduce
into the new Parliament questions with respect to sees
which could not bear investigation, but to honour
bishops and parochial clergy when they d id their duty,
instead of making their sees and th_eiercottcluct matters
of daily discussion in that House. H
his opposition to the Bill. shoveld continue
Lord CLIVE supported the Bill. He considered that
more danger might be apprehended from limiting the
-trumber of bishops than from extending th eir number.
There was no force in the objections ageeinst the new
bishops having a seat in the House of Lords..--(Divide.)
Mr. AGLIONBY denied that Dissent was: not rife in
the diocese of Carlisle, as various Dissenting congrega-
tions existed.
Mr. GOULBURN did not deny that Diss eat existed
in the diocese of Carlisle.
Sir. J. GRAHAM explained that he did n of say that
Dissent did not exist in the diocese of Carlisle.. Ile said
that the Right Rev. Prelate did not meddle • with trifles,
and that as harmony. isteJl between the whc 'le church
body, Dissent
other dioceses. 'l",iies?L'itter and antagonisti c than in
After a few word 1-)kCLAND,
Mr. DUNCON s from Mr.' LEFROY and Mr.
30. highly of IBE said, I 'on Gentlemen wh
the Noblein this matter
o spoke
would do well to u Lord's" conduct
(Laughter)—and IliToWrt him at; the ensuing chic t to
they goad he advised him tos the gr eat friend of the C ?itirch
his sea t, behind him as his so
come ever to his side, sea d take
extingui:eher upon the Gov ppoi ter. They ha d put an
aertere, sit manufactu ring ten
after bishops, toed he thought, rbirry. had take re place,
that the Noble Lord would not
more bishops.—(Laughter.) Al; ee sfi
rate, n'Ziefrisiev't env
‘ly
1
he would b
disposed so to dabble, he trusted :orevard
• his Bills earlier, in order not to drive the discutisio n of
them to almost the last day of the session.
!Mr. COLLETT rose amidst lot id calls for a divis ion.
It?. said the very name of bisl top was offensie .e—
-(Laughter)—and considered that the country could do
very well without their aid. The.) were now going ; to
meet their constituents, and many of them might not

Agreed to. .
The other orders of the day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned.

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 21, 1847.