The Sun.
London, England, 1840-07-21 00:00:00

Act for Ireland distinctly recognised the Lessees as
having a fair right to compensation. The decision of 1
the Committee in this case was in strict analogy with
that of the Church Rate Committee. Before expunging
the clause, at all events, it would be but fair to hear
Counsel for the petitioner; it would be but just, if they
were determined to set aside law, equity, and common
sense, to do so deliberately.
Sir R. INGLIS had not the same desire to make
the same speech twice over, as had been evinced by the
first and last Hon. Members who had addressed the
House. He would rely upon the arguments which he
had already urged upon the House to reject the amend-
ments that bad been introduced in the Committee.
Mr. EASTHOPB explained.

_ .
Sir G. GREY said there was an understanding that
they should that day discuss the question of compensa-
tion. He thought the House could not allow the peti-
tioner to be heard by counsel, and he therefore hoped
the motion would be withdrawn, and the House allowed
to proceed with the question agreed for discussion.
Mr. AGLIONBY concurred in the recommenda-
tion that the motion should be withdrawn, while at the
same time he admitted it was very natural the petitioner,
who was largely interested in this Bill, should desire to
have an opportunity of expressing his sentiments on
this measure.
Mr. EASTHOPE knew there was an understand-
ing, and, therefore, withdrew his motion, at the same
time observing that he did not consider the great ques-
tion of compensation compromised by his so doing.
Mr. LAM BTON said the principle of compensa-
tion had been admitted every time the question of the
interest of the Church Lessees had been brought
before the House. It had been established by the
Irish Church Temporalities Bill ; it had also been
admitted during the debates on the Church-rate ques-
tion, by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Pembroke, by the Hon. and Learned Member for
Exeter, by the Hon. and Learned Member for Ripon.
—(The Honourable Gentleman here quoted various
passages from the speech of Sir William Fol-
lett, on Church-rates, in support of those views.)
It was a manifest robbery to take Church property from
the lessees without granting them any compensation,
and be hoped and trusted the House would not sanc-
tionsuch an injustice.

Mr. PHILLPOTTS was also opposed to the mo-
tion. It would render questionable the rights of pro-
perty, and interfere with settled engagements.
After a few words from Mr. HUME, strangers were
ordered to withdraw, but no division took place.
Lord STANLEY having risen to address the
House, said that the House had had to deal
with the subject some time since, upon the ques-
tion of the temporalities of the Church of Ireland ;
and on that occasion he had considered that there were
two courses to pursue—either to give protection against
the injury which he was inflicting by Act of Parlia-
ment, or to give compensation for it. In that mea-
sure he thought it right to give protection, as
that measure was to deal generally ; but in a case
like the present, where private interests were af-
fected, he thought there ought to be compensation.
He did not believe the compensation would be anything
considerable, but he felt a very large principle was in-
volved in the question. He had on all former occa-
sions, whether on that side or the other side of the
House, supported the principle of protection or compen-
sation to individuals on whom injury was about to be in-
flicted by Act of Parliament for no fault of their own ;
and if a division was taken on the question, he must
support the view which he understood had been taken
by the Select Committee, and support the claim ; not
for compensation, but for an arbitration, as to whether
the individual was entitled to compensation or not.
Mr. GOULBURN rose, but was met with loud
cries of " Spoke, spoke."
The SPEAKER said it was difficult to recollect
who had spoken on the former occasion, but he thought
the Right Hon. Gentleman had merely spoken on the
quastioa of adjournment, and not upon the merits of the
case.

Mr. GOULBURN said it was always painful for him
to differ from his Noble Friend who had just sat down.
The Right Hon. Gentleman said the lessees in England
and Scotland in this case stood upon a very different
footing from the lessees in Ireland, whose rights were
saved by the Churcll Temporalities Act. The lessees
in this case had no title to compensation at ail ; be-
sides, the Committee had dealt only with the claims of
two lessees. There were other two whose claims were
not thought or by the Committee. That was an anomaly
which the House would cure by agreeing to the motion
of the Right Hon. Member for the University of Oxford.
Mr. DENISON said, that these gentlemen had
paid first 16,0001. and then 13,0001. for purchase of
their rights. The lessees were the only parties that
suffered. The Bishop gained, the Archdeacon gained,
and the only persons who lost were these unfortunate
lessees ; and he contended that in custom, usage, pre-
scription, and honour, they were entitled to compensa-
tion. He would state what that compensation was
valued at : their valuors declared that the lessees would
lose three years' purchase, and it was very unfair that
these gentlemen should be so dealt with.

Sir-S. LUSH' NGTON differed from his Hon.
Friend who last spoke, and he could not but think that
this division, although of singular kind, would be one
that would reflect great honour on the House, because
it would exhibit on this Private Bill, gentlemen of both
sides of the House voting without being influenced by
party motives according to their individual opinions of
rightandjustice.—(Cheers.) His Hon. Friend had stated
that certain valuers had stated that the compensation
ought to be three years' purchase. The uncer-
tainty of renewal would render it utterly impossible
to calculate on any compensation. In the present
case the only interest to be considered was the interest
of the party who possessed the right to the property,
and that party had an absolute right to dispose
of it as he might think proper. Under all the circum.
stances he felt it his duty to vote for the clause of the
Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for the University of
Oxford.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided, when the numbers were
For the clause .
79
Against it ................... 81
Majority
The Bill was then ordered to be read a third time on
Thursday next.
Mr. MA CKINNON gave notice of his intention
early in the next session to renew his motion with re-
spect to the importation of Hill Coolies.
Captain PEC HELL gave notice of his intention to
move to-morrow for certain returns relative to the Ad-
miralty.
On the motion of Sir R. INGLIS, certain returns
were ordered with respect to the Canonries and Dea-
neries now vacant.
ECCLESIASTICAL DUTIES AND REVE.

NUES BILL.
On Lord JOHN RUSSELL moving the Order c)
the Day for the third reading of this Bill,
Sir ROBERT INGLIS presented a petition from
the Chancellor of the Deanery of Exeter against the Bill.
The Right Hon. Baronet thonght the Bill was still
open to great objection. It introduced suppression where
suspension would have been sufficient, and confiscation
was the principle where contribution ought to have
been. He could not allow the Bill to pass without
raising his voice against it.
Mr. HUME had to express his regret that the
Bill did not go far enough. As far as it went it
in his opinion was a good Bill. It provided for a mere
new distrsbution of the revenues of the Church—it put
down a number of useless sinecures—it would have
been better had it gone farther ; but he must protest
against the application of the words suppression and
confiscation as applied to it. He had no
doubt it would work for the benefit of the
country, and that the example would soon be carried
further.

Mr. GLADSTONE felt bound also to state that in
his opinion the Bill was open to considerable objection.
There was one point to which he wished to call the at-
tention of the House. Many of the opponents of the
present Bill, and he was certainly one of their number,
had opposed it on the ground that the establishment
which it left to Cathedrals was placed upon so inse-
cure and precarious a foundation, that the present
pp
measure appeared, as it were, only to prepare
them for further measures of reduction. That was the
danger they had to apprehends
and he was bound to
say he did not believe any Cathedral institution could
be secure whether it had twenty canons, twelve, or four,
or two, unless the patronage of these institutions
should be exercised with fidelity ; and he grieved
to say that during the period the Bill bad
been under discussion in that House events had
taken place which appeared to him to prove
the Government was not yet convinced of the necessity
(ries of " Hear, hear.")
of giving to the Cathedral Establishments that security
which was the only efficient security it could have,
namely, the security that arose from a right distri-
bution of their patronage.—C
He would be the last man to complain of the Govern-
ment exercia'ng their power and influence in favour of
those who concurred with them in political opinion, but
an appointment had taken place within the last few
weeks of which he could not approve, he meant
the appointment of Warden to the Collegiate Church of
Manchester. It was in vain that by this Bill they cutoff one
half of an abuse, if they pursued the old method of ap-
pointment to offices which still remained. He did not
mean to say one word which could be considered per-
sonally disrespectful to the gentleman who now filled that
situation. As a poet and a scholar, he admired him ;
but it should be recollected that the collegiate church of
Manchester was in fact the parish church of a popula-
tion of 10,000 souls, and they ought to have appointed
to that office a gentleman who would have thoroughly
comprehended his position, instead of one whose dis-
tinctions, let them be what they might, had not been
derived from parochial ministration ; but this gentleman
was also rcator of Spofforth, a parish containing 2 000
souls, and the income from which was 2,0001. a year.
It was, in his opinion, an abuse to retain rectory en-
dowed preferments, without attaching duties to them.
From the great interest which the Noble Lord, the '
Secretary to the Colonies, bad always manifested to in-
crease the utility of the Church, he at once acquitted

him of having had any share in making the appoint.
ment. He did not wish to interfcre with the preroga-
tives of the Crown or ecclesiastical patronage ; but this
was one of the most important and strictly paro-
chial offices in the country.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
He objected to that appointment, because it could not
have been made with a view to promote the spiritual
interests of the Church.

Colonel SIBTHORP could not allow the Bill to
pass without raising his voice against it. It. was calcu-
lated, like many other measures of the present Govern-
ment, to undermine the Established Church, and he
hoped that in another House there would be determi-
nation enough to throw out a Bill so pernicious. The
existing Government had overturned all the established
institutions of the country. They would, by the mea-
sure they were then about to pass, degrade the Church,
and he conscientiously considered them a most danger-
ous body.
Mr. DARBY considered, that in the case of the
lessees, compensation ought to be given, on the princi-
ple to which the House had assented in the previous
division.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not propbse to pro-
vide for any compensation to the lessees by. this Bill.
The whole subject must come before the House in a
general manner, in which he thought it would be right
to have regard to the interests of the lessees. But as
the Commissioners, under the present Bill, would have
the power of renewal, ani as the lessees had not now
the power of compelling the renewal of their leases,
he did not see that they had any claim to compen-
sation.—( Hear.) With respect to what an Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite had asked respecting the appointment
of a certain gentleman to the dignity of Warden, he
(Lord J. Russell) could not disown all responsibility
in that appointment, for he had expressed his appro-
bation of it at the time, although he did not know so
much of the gentleman as the Noble Lord who made
the appointment.
After a few words from Mr. DARBY,
Mr. GOULBURN said the Ecclesiastical Commis-
sioners were bound in justice to make the bargain which
would be most consistent with the interests of the
Church. He for one could never consent to be a
party to any arrangement by which those persons who
had leases for tithes, and which leases were now out,
would be permitted to come forward and claim com-
pensation. His object was to promote the spiritual
instruction of the people, and anything that diminished
the funds of the Church would interfere with that ob-
ject, and meet with his decided opposition.
The Bill was then read a third time.
LordJ. RUSSELL proposed an additional clause,
respecting the prebendaries of Ely, but we could not
hear to what effect.
Mr. GOULBURN said he claimed, on behalf of
the University of Cambridge, perfect equality with the
University of Oxford, and he did not understand why
seven professorships should be endowed at Oxford and
only two at C ambridge. The Noble Lord proposed by
this clause, in the first place, that two prebendaries of
Ely should- be retained, and conferred only on persons
holding particular professorships. He thought this was
not a fair provision, and he felt it, therefore impossible
to assent to the clause without considerable amendment.
On a former occasion he had stated the claims of these
professors to the House, which, by his clause, the Noble
Lord admitted. Ho had prepared a clause to meet the
case, aed he would move that it be brought up.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished his clause to be
put in the Bid. Of course, if the House did not like
it, then the Right Honourable Gentleman might move
his. He thought the Cathedral of Ely was not so inti-
mately connected with the University as to justify the
equality asked for by the Right Hon. Gentleman.
The clause of the Noble Lord having been read,
Mr. GOULBURN said as the clause stood the
prebends when vacant were to be given to a professor,
but they were not of necessity to be given to his suc-
cessor. In tile case of Oxford the Prebends were per-
manently annexed to the professorship. He only wanted
equality.
Lord STANLEY thought his Right Hon. Friend
had not properly understood the clause ; it was provided
that all but professors should be disqualified from hold-
ing the prebends.
Mr. GOULBURN said the Cathedral of Ely was
as much intended for the benefit of the University of
Cambridge as that of Christchurch w.is for Oxford.
He moed the substitution of four in place of two in the
clause.

The

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
House divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment 26
Against it 6O
Majority
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the
Bill.

Several other clauses were brought up by Lord J.
RUSSELL, and added to the Bill by way of riders.
Mr. ACLAND moved the following clause :
" Provided always, and be it enacted, That nothing
herein contained shall extend to deprive any Arch-
deacon or his successors of any endowment or patron-
age to which such Archdeacon is now by law entitled
in right of his Archdeacoory," which was ordered to be
added to the Bill by way of rider.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS was glad that a clause had
been introduced which would mitigate, in some degree,
the mass of evil contained in the Bill. He had also
given notice of a clause. the object of which was to
leave the frame-work of the Ecclesiastical Establish-
ment, as it now existed. The clause was as follows :
And whereas it is expedient that the several establish-
ments of the Cathedral and Collegiate Churches of
England and Wales should be maintained in their in-
tegrity, so far as relates to the number of Members
composing the said several establishments, and also so
far as relates to the maintenance of the several Col-
leges or Corporations of Minor Canons and Vicars
Choral of the said Cathedral or Collegiate Churches;
be it enacted, That nothing herein contained shall pre-
vent any patron or patrons from collating any person
duly qualified to any office, prebend, or dignity in any
Cathedral or Collegiate Church : provided always, that
the estate, hereditaments, income, and emoluments, now
by law vested in any such office, prebend, or dignity,
shall go and be applied in manner and according to the
provisions of the present Bill, any thing herein contained
to the contrary notwithstanding." He merely asked
on behalf of the Established Church, that its ministers,
constituting as they did a body of not less than
15,000 persons, looking forward to what might be
called the prizes in their profession, which were fewer
in number than the prizes in any other profession,
should not be deprived of the emoluments and the
honours of their profession. That was the object of the
clause, and he hoped the House would agree to it.
Lord J. RUSSELL opposed the clause, which he
contended was inconsistent with the object of the Bill,
which was that the ecclesiastical authorities should not
be greater in number than the duties required.
Mr. ESTCOURT supported the clause. He denied
it would be inconsistent with the principle of the Bill
to maintain those prebendal stalls, provided it could be
shown they could be supported without diminishing the
income required by the Bill.
Mr. GOULBURN felt himself placed in a difficult
position, because although he approved of the principle
of the clause, yet he was compelled to vote against it.
If the clause was admitted, three-fourths of the Bill
would have to be sttuck out ; and such a course was
totally unprecedented upon the third reading of a Bill.
Mr. ACLAND said he understood the principle
of the Bill was the application of their income, and not
the suppression of offices. He felt the force of the
practical objection of the Hon. Member for the Uni-
versity of Cambridge, but at the same time it was
his duty to vote for the clause, as he thought it of
great importance to retain spiritual offices, even when
they were not attended with any emolument. He had
received a petition containing the same sentiments, and
he was justified in saying that his was the opinion of
a great number of influential persons in the Church,
since many of them had affixed their names to it.
Mr. HUME would feel obliged by the Hon. Gen-
tleman informing him what he meant by spiritual offices
without duties attached to them. He thought this
petition exhibited somewhat of that worldly vanity
which the Church so frequently inveighed against.
Mr. ACLAND said the Hon. Member so identi-
fied officer and income that he could not conceive an
individual filling an office without being paid for it.
Those officers had certain duties which those who
filled them would willingly discharge for the good of the
Church. _ _

_......,..._
Mr. HUME said that he had always coupled duties
with offices and emoluments with duties.

The House then divided, when the numbers were—
For the clause l5
Against it 55
Majority against the clause —4O
On our return we found Sir T. ACL AND 'pro-
posing the following clause :—" And be it enacted, tlaat
a plan may, from time to time, be laid before the said
Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England by any of the
said Chapters of the several Cathedral and Collegiate
Churches, with the sanction of the visitors of the said
Churches respectively, for re-establishing any Canonry
or Canooriei which shall have been suppressed by or
under the provisions of this Act, by assigning towards
the re-endowment of any such Canonry or Canonries, a
portion of the divisible Corporate revenues remaining to
the said Chapters respectively, after paying to the said
Ecclesiastical Commissioners the profits and emoluments
of the suppressed Canonry or Canonries, so that the
profits and emoluments of such suppressed Canonry or
Canonries be not thereby diminished, and also by ac-
cepting and assigning for the same purpose any further
endowment, in money or in lands, tithes, or other here-
ditaments, such lands, tithes, or other hereditaments not
exceeding in yearly value the sum of two hundred pounds
for each such Canonry so to be re-established ; and
also, by annexing to any such Canonry so to be re-esta-
blished, any suitable benefice in the patronage of the
said Chapters respectively, or of any other patron, with
the consent of such patron, and, where any Bishop is
patron, with consent of the Archbishop ; and any such
plan may be carried into effect under the authority
hereinafter provided, and such alteration may be made
in the existing statutes and rules of the said Chapters
respectively, as the case may require, under the autho-

rit) 'nereinhefore provided for making alterations in ex-
isting statutes.
The clause having been brought up,
Lord J. RUSSELL did not see the same objection
to the present clause as he did to those of the Hon.
Member for the University of Oxford. He could con-
ceive cases where the chapter feeling that an advantage
might be gained by an addition to their numbers, it
might be judicious to give them the power of making
that addition, but there were objections to the plan, as
it might diminish the revenues of the existing canonrics.
Unless there were strong objections to the clause, he
should not oppose its being added to the Bill, and going
in that shape to the House of Lords for its decision.—
(Hear,hear.)
Mr. PROTHEROE had heard with very great re-
gret the observations of the Noble Lord, and should
decidedly object to the clause.
The clause was then added to the Bill by way of
rider.

Several verbal amendments were then agreed to, and
the remaining clauses up to clause 32 were gone through
seriatim.

On the reading of the 32d clause,
Mr. ACLAND objected to the retrospective cha-
racter of the clause as it affected the deans.
Sir R. INGLIS coincided with the objection, and
said that the clause was intended to affect the Dean of
Exeter.. He hoped his Hon. Friend would take the
sense of the House.
Mr. ACLAND replied that he would certainly do so
The House then divided, when the numbers were—
For the clause 76
Against it
Majority

-68

The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
CLERGY RESERVES, CANADA.

On the reading of the Order of the Day for the
farther consideration of the Report on the Canada
Clergy Reserves Bill,
Mr. PAKINGTON expressed his satisfaction at
the improvement which had been made in the Bill,
which, he said, enabled him to withdraw his opposition
to it, although he did not altogether approve of all its
provisions. He trusted the Bill would have the effect
of laying the foundation of virtue and religion in Canada,
and that it would lead to its ultimate prosperity.
Mr. HUME differed altogether from the Hon. Mem-
her who had just sat down. Instead of the Bill being
amended, in his opinion it had been made much worse.
He had expected, from the letter which the Noble
Lord had addressed to the Governor-General of Canada,
that he would have acted in accordance with the wishes
of the majority of the people of both provinces. lie
was surprised that the Noble Lord should attempt to
force upon the people of Canada tie distribution of the
clergy reserves for the purposes proposed in the present
Bill. There were several clauses in the Bill to which
he had the greatest objections, and it was his intention,
in Committee, to propose to leave out the 7th clause,
which guaranteed the payment of the sum set apart by
the sth clause, for the payment of the Protestant clergy
in Canada.
Sir R. INGLIS, while be admitted that the Bill
had been improved, felt bound to say that lie considored
it retained still a preat and predominant evil. He
could not, therefore, admire the Bill even with the
modifications introduced by the Noble Lord. He ob-
jected to the Bill, because it divested a large body of
her Majesty's subjects of property solemnly awarded to
them. For these reasons, he should say No to the fur-
ther progress of the Bill, though he should not give the
House the trouble of dividing upon it.
The House then resolved itself into Committee on
the Bill. The preamble was postponed ; and upon the
first clause being put,
Sir JAMESGRAH AM wished to ask the Noble
Lord the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether
he intended to include in this Bill the sale of the clergy
reserves in Lower Canada. If it was omitted, that
omission would give rise to very great discussion in
the Legislature of the Province when it should as-
semble.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said the reason for not
inserting the sa!e of the reserves of Lower Canada
was that the question had given rise to great discus-
sion and dispute in the Upper Province. A great
portion of the reserves in Lower Canada had already
been sold, but with regard to that portion still re-
maining unsold he would have no objection to the in-
troduction of a cause regulating the sale of the unsold
portion, and directing its sale and distribution accord-
ing to the principle adopted in the sale of the reserves
in Upper Canada.
Sir C. GREY said that there had not been the
same degree of litigation in the Lower Province that
there had been in the Upper. But still there had
been a great deal of correspondence on the subject, and
the reason why that heat had not been excited in
Lower Canada was that the Protestants felt it was a

matter that could not be pressed in the Assembly, and
since it had been felt that the Legislative Council was
not an arena for discussing the subject. But now that
there was but one Assembly, he thought unless the
Lower Province were included there would be the
same heats and animosities there as there had been in
the Upper Province. With regard to the clause under
discusion, he thought it would be better to leave
it open to the Governor and the Society to sell more
than one hundred thousand acres if it should be de-
sirable. The object being endowment the sale of only
100,000 acres, would leave only 7,000/. or 8,000/.
to be divided among all the sects.—(Hear.) Now,
in Upper Canada there were 70,000 Catholics, besides
other sects, and thet•cfore he thought that amount would
not be sufficient. He would gladly have seen some-
thing attempted by taking a bulk of land for the purpose
of disposing of it at once, so as to form an adequate
foundation for an endowment.

Mr. GLADSTONE hoped the Noble Lord would

include Lower Canada in the provisions of the Bill

He did not think that would at all increase the opposi-
tion to the Bill. He would suggest whether it would
not be possible to introduce a proviso, making the
rules applicable to the sale of Crown lands applicable
also to the sale of clergy reserves. He would propose
the insertion of such a proviso in the clause, if it should
be approved of.
Mr. HUME thought that such a proviso ought not,
in any manner, to affect the appropriation, as it would
be unjust to give the same proportion to the Church
in Lower Canada as in the Upper Province.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL doubted whether the
words proposed by the Hon. Gentleman could with
propriety be introduced, as there were considerations
of a political nature affecting the sale of Crown lands,
which did not apply to the clergy reserves.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM thought the objections of
the Noble Lord were very strong ; but if the Noble
Lord had chosen to adopt the suggestion of making the
Bill applicable to the Lower Province, he thought
that more than 100,000 acres should be sold. He
thought they should be sold as soon as possible, and that
the same appropriation should take place in the Lower
as in the Upper Province, as the Catholic Church there
was amply provided for.
Mr. PAKINGTON hoped the Noble Lord would
not depart essentially from the proviso proposed. Ile
thought that nothing like the value of the land would
be produced, if it were forced into the market. He
thought the calculation of the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber for Tynemouth was much too low. He thought
it desirable that no portion of this property should re-
main as a bone of contention for the new Canadian Le-
gislature.
Sir GEORGE GREY thought the difficulty might
be got over by restricting the sale to 100,000 acres, un-
less the approbation of the Secretary of State for the
sale of a greater quantity should be previously obtained.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL would consider the sug-
gestion relating to Lower Canada before the bringing
up the Report.
On clause 2 being proposed,
Mr. GOULBURN moved there be added to the
clause the words " The monies to arise from the sale of
the Clergy Reserves to be paid to such officer or offi-
cers as shall be appointed by her Majesty." He did
not know what public securities there were in Canada,
but in the present state of circumstances they must
be subject to great fluctuation.

Sir C. GREY was afraid that such a provision would
take out of the province a considerable portion of the
capital. It would be better for the province, and the
Church itself, that the capital should be left in the pro-
vince, where it was much wanted.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL opposed the amendment,
because he thought it would be exhibiting a want of
confidence in the public securities of the province.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM supported the amendment.
The Committee divided, when there appeared--
For the Amendment
Against it 5B
Majority against the Amendment -30
The clause (as also clause 3) was then agreed to.
On clause 4 being put,
Mr. HUME complained that the clause would press
unfairly on Roman Catholics, whose interests the Bill
did not provide for.
Lord J. RUSSELL had no wish to press unfairly
on the Roman Catholics of Canada. He had made
for them all the provision which he felt it in his power
to do.

Mr. DARBY thought that the funds should have
been appropriated exclusively to the Established Church,
to the exclusion of Roman Catholics altogether.
After a few words from Sir C. GREY,
The clause, as amended, was agreed to, as was also
clause 5.

Mr. HA WES said he understood, as the clause at
present stood, it provided that any deficiency that ex-
isted should h.; made good out of the Consolidated Fund.
Now, he should certainly object to the Bishop of Toronto
being appointed treasurer, beceuse he had, in that
capacity, been guilty of misappropriating tract-money
placed in his hands.
The CHANCELLOP of the EXCHEQUER
supported the clause.
__

Sir CHARLES GREY said the Bishop of Toronto
%as a man of stuiborn and stirlicg integrity, and he
doubted not that upon a proper investigation it would
be found that the money which bad been vested in his
bands was as safe as any other description of security.
Mr. HUME said the despatches of Governor