The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-12 00:00:00

IRISH TURNPIKE ACTS.

Mr. PIGOTT moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to continue the Irish Turnpike Act, expiring at the
end of or during this or the next Session of Parliament.
—Granted.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER (IRELAND) BILL,
On the motion of Mr. PIGOTT the Court of Ex•
chequer (Ireland) Bill was read a second time and or•
dered to be committed.

TITHE COMPOSITION (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. PIGOTT moved the second reading of the
Tithe Composition (Ireland) Bill.
After a few words from Mr. SHAW, the Bill was
read a second time and ordered to be committed.

The House adjourned at a Quarter past Eigh
o'Clock.

CHURCH PATRONAGE (SCOT

LAND).

On the motion of Mr. Fox Manic, a return has been
laid before the House of Commons, of presentations by
patrons to parishes within the Church of Scotland, and
of cases in which the veto has been exercised between
August 1834 and April 1840. The veto had been exer-
cised in about thirty instances, creating in some parishes
violent disputes, and leading to tedious and expensive pro-
ceedings in the Ecclesiastical and Law Courts. The de-
tails are interesting, as showing the working of the Veto
Act, and the extremely small numbers that are entitled to
vote under the Church-law, made by the men who say no
candidate shall be appointed in opposition to the will of
the people. The largest number of communicants given
in any of the returns is 86 for the parish of Abernethy,
containing, according to a census made ten years ago, a
population of 2,092. Of these 18 refused to sign the call,
and 28 signed it, thus only 46 persons out of 2 092 came
forward to exercise tho veto. In the parish of Glenelg,
containing a population of 2,874, only 40 are entitled to
vote, and of these but 6 exercised the veto. Thus in a
parish containing, at a moderate calculation, about 800
heads of families and males above twenty-one years of age,
but 40 were allowed to vote, and of these 6 usurped the
patronage. Can there be a greater mockery of what is
called by the hypocrites " the popular voice?" In the parish
of Inch, with a population of 1338, the roll of communi-
cants contains twenty-three names, only twelve of whom
were present at the moderation of the call, six signed the
call, and six declined ; the first s x, according to the veto
act, carried the election. In the parish of Daviot (where
the presentee was rejected about two years ago, the dispute
still remaining unsettled) there are just five communicants
for a population of 1788 ! The Presbytery Clerk of Alford,
thei dare, might well reply in answer to the:question, " For
what reason was the veto exercised ?" " Reason ! the veto
is neither founded on reason, nor does it admit of reasons."
The Presbytery Clerk of Langholm, in reference to the
veto being exercised, but without effect, on the presentation
made by the Duke of Bueeleuch for Eskdalemuir, writes
in a similar strain. " The veto was exercised for no
reason, but from a perverse, turbulent spirit and hatred to
patronage ; any presentee, there is reason to believe,
would have been vetoed unless an absolute choice had been
given, and in that case the very man so unjustly opposed
would in all probability have been proposed in preference
to any other. The presentee is now exceedingly well
liked in the parish." The Presbytery Clerk of Mull
makes this return. " The veto was not exercised in any
of those cases, but all were contested to an extent which
caused hews and animosities." So much for the famous
specific of Dr. Chalmers.