The Sun.
London, England, 1841-09-24 00:00:00

MORNING SUN

cessary for ohtninino• a r,,,liteti,n of the ditties levied ja,
;0;11 th,bat
Mr. TWINING felt regret than the course of t"eieht:
should be interrupted by an adjou; nment, and he tho
was a tnod unsasfactor way to terinate it.
Mr. WE DING said he had movedm the motion of an
the
meat in consequence of there being two rnotions on the
subject before the Court ht
Major OLIPHANT said he thought that the Court ongedof,
to adjourn till every motion on the paper was disPontle
What master was it whether there were two motions

.......
same subject or not? _ Tote
After a short explanatory conversation betvreen Vr. d,ter!
00
son, Mr. Salomons, and .slr. Lewis, the motion for a ?..n
ment was put, and a show of hands taken, but the _l 11_lurjk
being nearly equal, a division was called, and the C 0
videi, when there appeared— 15
For the motion.
................. •••
12
Against it.
Majority for the motion .................. _3
The Court then adjourned.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT'

HOUSE OF LORDS, Sept. 23. 0,c;o0.
The!r Lordships met to-day at Half-past Three •
segG
The Earl of CARLISLE took the oaths And hi Score'
Lord COTTENHAM gave two judgments hid derieg
appeals ; after which their Lordehips 1
wou
pleasure.
the
'.l he LORD CHANCELLOR took his sea, on
sack
,at Five o'Clock. • • - eel°.
On the motion of Lord WHARNCLimere3
correspondence of Lord John Russell and the
of Normanby was ordered to be laid on the tah'elo the
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition ft()coesti
in the jeoie
Rev. Sir Harcourt Lees, of Black. House,.
of Dublin, praying'their Lordships to expel the het t:
from the Kingdom. The Noble Lord suited
cleat le
could not support the prayer of the petition; in
felt bound to object to it.
THE RAJA OF SATTARA. .„0
adjourne
ema
Lord BROUGHAM also presented a Pet'tliorflse)'
Rating from a public meeting held in Dublin °,ir
ago, and signed by the Chairman, praying.- their °t
ships to take into consideration the case of t'''"ce io
Sattara, for the purpose of using their influen-
Dier
storing to him his possessions. orn
Earl RA.DNOR- presented a petition, ;I•yeatre'r,
chants, bankers, and other inhabitants ei of
praying that a tax might be levied on the Pre'e-at, of to
United States coming into Canada, for the belle- prochl"
revenue of the United Kingdom, and that stle-erey.
should then be imported duty free into this coon
"
ASSIGNEES IN BANKRUPTCI.,, 00 gr'
The Earl of DEVON presented a petition 'tre'''.
Adam Murray, the land agent, of Parliarne°
complaining of the loss he had incurred by th:tepl!esi
of Mr. Abbott, the official assignee to 'Messrs' I",.oelse,
son and Co. He believed if the creditors had e,:"0-0111
a due degree of vigilance, so large an amount 11 oieco
have been suffered to remain in the hands of the: 0i
assignee. The subject, however, was worthY
diate and earnest consideration of their Lordelnr bsetyr.
Lord BROUGHAM entirely concurred in the °tese iest•
tions of the Noble Earl, and he thought the st°
he had made would be worthy of consideratieli lye
event of any contemplated alteration in the
His Noble Friend was quite correct as to the mst bet",
which the official assignees were appointed ; bY;
lieved the selection was made, in the first insta,lleoeore
Board composed of the Governor and Deputy
of the Bank of England, the Governor an
5000 000 °
s ,
Governor of the East India CompanYil t -
the principal merchants of the City, and ;bell
three Judges of the Bankruptcy Court. Whet% 0.
pointments were making, there were not les'. 0';
1,500 candidates for the different eituatioassgile
therefore so far as the field of choice was cohceffsr
it was ample enough. It only showed how futi.leito
all, the most strict and searching investigation roof 3ir:,
meter was, for, at the time of the appointneenteloct;
Abbott, no one could receive a higher eu,teoa-
for integrity and business habits. Netwiteieriturci
ing the objections of the petitioners, he would 4010
however, to say, that there was no power under 00
Bankruptcy Act which had given more satisfactienoe:il
the appointment of official assignees. Iti_niliirco 1
to him that the allowing so large
remain in the hands of the official °
let
was extremely injudicious, and argued a great °ea
the interests of the creditors. ; nioate f
Lord COTTENHAM had, previous to res.g
Seals, directed an inquiry to be made into the asiA
with a view of preventing its recurrence, but
11'
yet received the report. thg
The Earl of DUCIE presented petitions fro-der
Dissenters of Ebenezer Chapel, London, Woottonors'
Edge, and other places, praying for a repeal of the 0
laws. The Noble Earl also presented a petition fre° ttl°
Ministers' Meeting at the Conference of Minister' Peegd
Manchester, on the subject of the Corn-laws. lie bteiiio:
to call the attention of their Lordships to the PecoThisr
as he looked upon it as well worthy of theirber of
deration, not only on account of the nuntettbel
signatures attached to it, upwards of six hundredi,eue"teore
it also represented the feeling of upwards of iv' d the
ministers. This large body o Dissenttebresyeownesriedeorrepe
Corn-laws religiously wronee because
tae
to the spirit movements Bible. The present petition was 004
of a series of on the part of the countr),:.,to fee
would either be for good or for evil, accordine,,,eore"
mode in which they were met by the Executive ti„ from
ment. The Noble Lord having read several estrae the
the petition, observed that he could not but OPre'c'tils,',
regret he felt at the postponing all inquiry inteio43
tressed state of the country till the next year. .itti V.'"
undoubted fact that hundreds and hundreds during. - leente
year had fallen into an untimely grave in case(' let
of these laws, and he felt convinced that before the)hter
again thousands would have been added to th°se,„t re'
j
dreds. He thought such a postponement a titre did
for any Government to undeettece,oo!
one which he must confess he thought roti
not have been undertaken by a Coo eti3'.'
Government. He thought a fraud had been Pr:ea th°
on the people by the Noble End who had prne-ad, Its
Amendment to the Address. If there was no fratt.,4
thought the Noble Duke had no confidence in tte.
he led, and that mutual confidence was an open `r-
iu the Cabinet.—(Hear, hear.) refs
Lord COTTENHAM moved for certain rete,rn'ejte
tive to the sittings in the Court of Chancery.---Agreel, 011
Lord BROUGHAM gave notice that ne 5110iPt
Monday next, submit a proposition to their L°l4• dries"
with a view to obtain their concurrence in an Der
to the Crown, to call upon the Home DePslieerlifd
at the beginning of each Session, to lay before aft
meat a statement of anything that might Ws-peielP
done during the interval between that and the Pr-
Session upon the Report of Prison Inspectors.
CATHOLICS IN INDIA. les.°
Lorl CLIFFORD (of Chud!eigh) moved for a f
any official communications made towards the eflat° tljel
year 1834, or the beginning of the year 1835: de°oll
British Government at home by the Governov toe
of Ilindostan, relative to a correspondence bee 00,,54
the Governor-General and the Governor e` f tr
respecting the residence and the exercise °elettel
spiritual functions of any Roman Catholic miss"' eeir
in Hindostan; also a copy of
array have been made in 187,y the Gover)ofil
Madras to the British :_iovernmeri; hontre 161'
to two decrees. rleated, the ore Deceuileer tahse 00.
and the Other a few v".- tit).
days after. It
clac„
sible the
_eat objection might be made to the r-° weer
these papers, and that it might he 41)°,;(1
merely a petty squabble between some Jesuits s;reel'
tuguese priests, who the more they (1°- bch)"
any oramunicatinasor of
the better, as it might end in their o,efer,
converted to the Protestant faith. He trusted, 11 Ott;
their Lordships would not take such a view of the Tr,
ter, but would grant the papers he had moved f°: a °he
petition preseautnihtteeseildrefilhg.Loe.;me,mlridiahssnehNrioble and Learned Fr'ernberer:
drive nightcalled
the Jesuits s poksfi n t to?
address e
n;
hn tEstablishedehre Madv
as ot I
10 ,oto-;
It
tleman, when he used that phrase, evident-I.Y Whe
know its real meanincr, Dr.
for Johnsen' it
„ a JO°
asked what a Jesuit meaning,
p
, relihe d,
a man rather more clever than the 1,130°111
him so."—(Cheers and a laugh.) In that seaseliarceuer,-
Friend, Dr. Kenny, was a Jesuit, and the Ilft,,iits
Lees certainly was not. Again, when the JeLereeey,
perseoutedin France, and the French Ambass3.7, coarser
mended the English Minister to pursue a sialll3' teeerl','„
and confiscate the property they held in the using
funds, what was the reply of Lord North? The 'loo'
may be very bad men, but your Excellency mus_t,„
that if. the Devil himself had money in the Ofseee
funds St. Michael the Archangel would never take ilea..)
0.!)
them so long as -I am Minister of England."--(beece'
The Noble Lord then read several portions of ;oil"
place
onlatcheeh
at
td
Crooeaft
Jan.,
tna. t: o :
it
3E3
whichl:lt'it -eta. ttitreb:
dunce relative to the meaning of the term ilegoe'
educ
and observed that, having a knowledge of the 1)91-00t
able conduct of these men, he was not in the
ire
rentoci.
surpriseadthtaaadt
finding,Gazette
taken
imaneteeCrteials'lcgts of the Catholic
e
should have secular _Priests?'
solutions had been passed the effect that
abet Irishi Colleges
This was at a time when orn required
Jesuits
**opted to obtain so desirable an '5O-
- India, and when it was necessary that ?doe'
should '
man
Irtishha treginmi eeanntss
A be priests there to teach them the way to salv--"-,
beireeapplication had been made to the British Gove.°,ll,-'io,(l
for to allow English Missionaries to be eteist" a,
the ignorant Portuguese • - ide°
privets r fe.
the lime at
Goa. The Governor of Goa, fusedhelve"-
to allow the charge to be made, and Vie first
'feet'
of the correspondence he moved for related hatc°'-''' of
to t ,
It mite elit be said that their Lordshi had Incan'eot'
psn
knewine• whether these persons were priests oc
ho
further than that they called themselves so, but t''` rho
contended, was no ground for believing theta to be etc
persens they represented themselves. In some `ther''.,
sects which dissented from the Church of England,:tie
were persons calling themselves Catholic priests, " ,ei
whether e
would put it to their Lordships to say wes;eit:-.1131::
would assume them to be such on that declaration.
cases were precisely similar, so far as he could see.i.
December, 1834, a Magistrate of the province ° re"
hall took from the recognised Catholic clerg,c var
cognised as such by the Vicar-Apostolic of Meeire.s--1
chapels, and imprisoned them because Wel' reinsetievi
deliver up, the keys of those churches, .402) theY
been for six years in quiet and peaceeeNie possessiO3,ere
Nay more, if his information were eer erect, they %le'
put to the torture, although the •ecery
_Let of their- hnot
had possession for a perieel s'ee
Y' are was a. pro°`:.o.
they were entitled t he
Ve-.1,4085e5-:-Irei of these el11,1,1.'„ of
The consequelecee was, that 800,re00 Roman Catho"Llittie
India, ant lee. believed the nir,leer was at present rxis
shoetof.a million, were deprive ;_t oesiefy or eight): chs'
where they were in the hale
,t or receivingreligion4:rir
struction. These chapels ‘,eere put into the hands of
~:je
tuguese priests who tar the subjects of Great, 3;1,., of
that they owed no 'aernPoral allegiance to the Queeiirei
England, or no F,piritual allegiance to the Pope. the
that justice ? was it common sense ? Was that

I

MORNING SUN

way in which they meant to calculate the Catholics of
India. He had now stated the nature el' the • :
asked for. It had been suggested to him that thc ihatt.t i•
was unworthy the consideration of Par:iainent. What ho
complained of was this, that the Trustees of 50 or GO Ca-
tholic chapels had been imprisoned—it was said,
had been put to torture—for refusing to give up posses-
sion of their chapels to Portuguese Princes who were
not subjects of her Majesty.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH wished to know upon
-what authority the Noble Lord had accused any s,:r-
Nants of the East India Company of putting any parties
to torture ?

Lord CLIFFORD said that such a report had gone
about.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH asked if any Englishman
had used the word torture, and accused any of the ser-
vants of the East India Company of executing it ?
Lord CLIFFORD said that no English subject had
used the word torture, but he understood that those per-
sons who were imprisoned by the magistrates were
tortured.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH wished the Noble Lord to
read the foreign word which he translated torture.
Lord CLIFFORD, having read part of the letter,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said he should not follow
the Noble Lord in his defence of the Jesuits ; neither
should he follow him in his attack upon the Portuguese
TriestS. Of them he knew nothing, except that they
lad conducted themselves peaceably in India, and had
.clischargad their duties. It would, perhaps, be proper
that he should state- shortly the circumstances out of
which the transactions arose that had been referred to by
the Noble Lord. A dispute arose bQtween the English
Catholic clergymen and the Portuguese priests as to
Certain temporal possessions. The Government refused
e interfere in the quarrel ; and the parties av-
.,' ealed to the Civil Courts, which decided in fa-
-1 our of the Portuguese. But he (Lord Ellen-
-1 orough) was persuaded that no Magistrate in ad-
ministering the law could have inflicted torture
upon any party. The charges of the Noble Lord oppo-
ite were brought forward on anonymous authority, and
St appeared to him (Lord Ellenborough) that his state-
2rents were not only not well founded, but could not lead
n y useful result. He had no objection to grant the
papers moved for, and he should take care that they
should :;be produced at the shortest possible delay,
in order that the Noble Lord might have an opportunity
f offering any explanations he might wish upon the subject.
After a few words from Lord CLIFFORD, the motion
vas agreed to.