The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-04 00:00:00

Mt.

LONDON:
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, Is4l.

The
PEEns did not meet yesterday.
e;,,n the Commons the Chelsea Poor Bill was
k".."• a Second time, after a division called for 'by
' T
41. •-- T 1
UNcomEE.
tuongst the numerous petitions presented
tonst "e from Tring, in Hertfordshire, praying
T 1 the Jurors of that place might be summoned
te,--Ylesburv, six miles off, instead of their own
se'ntY town. Our present county divisions, con-
seelated as they are by a high antiquity, will
arareelY answer modern purposes. Our parishes
e already ascertained to be very unsuitable.
,c.i4:€ll fixed boundaries of space, which politi-
-14;48 /night suppose would for ever answer the
tioru lah-11,ded purposes, beome, by the progress of
thtion, that allc-powerful instrument of
fitiallge, unsuitable to our circumstances; and even
peer" a Conservative as Sir R. PEEL presents a
iti°ll to break up the ancient divisions of
'unties.
ilri,4rd JOHN RUSSELL'S Bill for Making further
3!,,1vL610n for securing the rights of voting for
errihers of Parliament was read a first time.
M''
i,„ WALLACE gave notice of • a motion, in
15est"unce to limit the right of the Crown in
'whiriug Peerages except on men of fortune,
leal.:1 we apprehend, the House of Lords will
entertain.
140:
.C. DOUGLAS announced his intention to
it 12Iu Committee on Mr. KELLY'S Bill, should
itiZiread a second time, that capital assaults on
tx—ge 'es under twelve years of age should be
0111Pted from its provisions.
itr. E. TENNENT moving the second read-
ofiyi the Copyright of Designs Bill,
r:WILLIAms denied that pirating patterns
extensively practised. He asserted that the
/4.4 ,would give rise to endless litigation; he exa-
kvoeu. at some length the evidence given in
thatu,r of the Bill, and concluded by moving
At it be read a second time in twelve months.
9lsnonNE seconded the amendment.
of 1,, the Vice-President of the Board
ferrePe) gave his support to the Bill. He re-
, the to the contradictory views entertained by
said r:Presentatives of the manufacturing districts
the ."Y manufacturers themselves, reprehending
tatiirltrodnetion into the Bill of the word " imi-
teAd().4)" and announced himself a friend to ex-
ol I,lrig the copyright for six months. He also re-
exitsltetitled that the five Acts which already
04. On the subject should be consolidated into
R
•Patei•. `-'IIEG opposed the Bill. Secrecy, dis-
best—' and moderate prices were, he said, the
1,i,h0 Protection. He thought that the persons
sullnorted the Bill would become the vic-
the' °f the law, should it pass. He agreed in
(ehlion that it would promote litigation, and
'good! whole, do a great deal more injury than

8108-- 4."/BRRT PEEL thought the present exten-
tl(lf the ,
eietit h c°l3 right
for three months was soffi-
ts his P li though he voted for the second reading,
tep,(ll3; illioo was not made up as the extent of pro-
' 4°ll which ought to be afforded. He will con-
"der ththat, the main point, on the next stage of
e
re!at,r* WARBuRToN would vote for the second
orzleigliiibiuty
but expected that in passing the details
ties,
would encounter great difficul-
-406.As the authors and owners of patterns were
lish°Nvo, he suggested that they should estab-
Jed a record of inventions, in order to enable the
otzoersttio vodetermine what was piracy ; and that
years should be given to enable par-
the Itill register their inventions. But even then
would not be complete unless an inter-
iiitlC:llll copyright was established. He objected
illet
ve the Bill, that it did not provide a cheap
°4 of trying the issue, and unless that were
i ded he should oppose the Bill in its subse-
. .€tAgCs.
P. EGERTON supported the Bill, because
Taa io.• • .
nty of the respectable mannfacturers of
!thire w favour.
trtttci.e• E-11-1017cuta}-; thought a ease had been
but out for extending the term of protection,
the at the same
time he was afraid of injuring
1:40491x Port trade. He was for the period of six
At; 18'.E.aTid for sending the Bill into Committee.
4-1-11 ATE contended against the doctrine
' vrltm-t.t and law could protect .or pro-
t,*ste th• .4IP. The Fren h, he " '
had "
Our
i.people, because they studied

g; 7-- 4 ' - '
,

pictures and statues from their infAncy, while
our population were refused admission into West-
minster Abbey or the Royal Aerldemy, unless
they paid for entrance. An Act of Parliament
had been passed to encourage the use of shoe-
buckles, and in five years afterwards the use of
buckles was unknown. He could not understand
Mr. WA RBURTON'S distincti'm between copyright
in books and copyright in designs ; he agreed,
however, with him that the details of the Bit
could not be worked, out, and he therefore
would vote against it.,

In the end Mr., 'WILLIAMS did not press his
amendment to a e.ivision, and the Bill was read a
second time, to be committed, pro forma, on
Friday.
On Mr. HODGES moving to commit the Con-
stabulary Bill, Mr. F. MAULE moved that it be
committed in six months. There was already an
Act of Parliament for providing a rural police,
-which, though attended with some expense, had
corresponding advantages.

After a short conversation the Committee was
put off for six months, on a division of 58 to 36.

The Abolition of the Punishment of Death Bill
was read a second time, with an understanding
that the principle should be debated on the mo-
tion for going into a Committee, which was fixed
for next Wednesday week.
The County Courts Bill went through a Com-
mittee, Mr. MAuLr having stated in Committee
that the salary of no Judge would exceed 1,5001.
a-year. The House then adjourned.

In the debate on Mr. COLQUHOUN'S motion,
the Catholic priests were censured by that gen-
tleman and others of his party, for using their
influence to attain political objects. " They de-
nounced men from the altar," he said, " in con-
sequence of the votes they had given. That was
a system which the House and the people of this
country could not allow to continue." Why not ?
is a question we beg leave to put to Mr. CoL-
QUHOUN and his friends. Why are the priests
not to use their influence, and the influence of
religion, to subserve a political purpose? We
cannot, in the spirit of party or faction, confine
the question to Catholic priests, but to priests of
every denomination, and they are all equally in-
terested in the answer. If the Catholic priests
may not bring spiritual terrors to bear on the
Catholic voter to promote a political purpose,
neither may the priest of the Establishment nor
the Dissenting minister; and the same rule
which would exclude politics from the Mass-
house, would also exclude them from the Parish
Church, the Presbyterian Kirk, and the Dissent-
ing Chapel. We apprehend that no priesthood
w ill support Mr. COLQUHOUN and his friends in
t'ais sweeping exclusion, and we shall state why
',ye think the doctrine quite untenable.
It cannot be denied that politics, though a man
may have to vote but once in five or six years,
is an important branch of moral duty. The more
seldom the vote has to be given the more circum-
spection is required in giving it. If it have to be
givenbut once in a man's life it becomes ofas much
consequence as a marriage, and needs the best
counsel of the best friends. To others than the
voter or the contracting party it is of more im-
portance than a marriage, for the good or evil of
that is confined to a man's own family, but his
vote may have a powerful influence on the public
welf ire. In general, a man's public duties, the
performance of which affects ethers fir more
than his domestic duties, are considered the
p'toper object of praise, admonition, or reproach.
To summon youth to arms to defend their
country, has ever been held to he the
duty of the aged, and those who advise or guide
society. At present the priesthood of different
denominations are the moral guides of the com-
munity, and what reason can be assigned for
withdrawing from their influence the public du-
ties which affect the welfare of all ? Shall they
be called on to reprove a man for drunkenness,
and be told they are to be silent when he accepts
a bribe or gives a dishonest vote ? Are they to
admonish him against stealing a penny or a loaf
of bread, and acquiesce in his forming one of a
band determined to rob the nation of its freedom ?
But it is easy to conceive that the votes of an
elector may have a powerful influence on the
priest and on religion ; and is his priest not then
to admonish him? Suppose Mr. HUME, or any
other honest and upright patriot, looking back at
the past, and over every part of the land at present,
coming to the natural and just conclusion that the
Church of England, as a political engine, is
an utter and complete failure, and therefore
moving in Parliament that it should be abo-
lished, would not the clergy of the Church
use their spiritual influence, and their friends
would think them justified in using it, to make
the electors vote against Mr. HuME'S project?
When the Dissenters were struggling for the
repeal of the Test Acts, or in their present
struggles for the abolition of Church-rates,
why should not their ministers use all the
spiritual influence at their command to secure
success ? Lord STANLEY's Bill is avowedly in-
tended to remove the electors from under the
influence of the Catholic priests, and reduce them
to dependence on the landlords. It is idle nonsense
to say, under such circumstances, that the Catho-
lic priests are not to use all their spiritual influ-
ence to defeat the hostile project. It is palpa-
bly ridiculous and absurd to constitute an order
of men the guides and mentors of the nation, to
submit to them as the ministers of the DEITY,
and then to tell them, when their own interest is
deeply concerned, that they are not to use their
spiritual power for their own protection.
Mr. COLQUHOUN may be assured that he
cannot withdraw political duties from the
cognizance and control of the priesthood
without at once degrading them to be mere po-
litical tools. Neither can he deny the Roman
Catholic priesthood the use of their power in
politics without forbidding the priests of the
Establishment and Dissenting ministers from
performing some of their most sacred and im-
portant functions. _ _ _

Mr. COLQUHOUN and his friends have, in fact,
no objection that spiritual thunder should be
used to slay their political enemies. They only
only object to its being directed against
themselves. Messrs. WNEILE and M'GEE, and
that batch of Church Missionaries, have
been dealing " their damnation " out pretty
handsomely against the Catholics. To what but
the use of the spiritual thunders of the Anglican
priesthood are the Tories indebted for being so
powerful in Parliament? They use the weapon,
but they will not allow others to use it. Their
conduct in this respect is consistent with their
usual. hypocrisy. They desecrate the altars of
GOD for their own factious purposes, and de-
nounce those who use them for the defence of
liberty.

It is lamentable to see the time of the House
of Commons, that ought to be devoted to the in-
terests and wants of the people, wasted night after
night in petty personal squabbles, or in exciting
for party purposes one portion of the community
against another, while every important measure
is utterly neglected. Lord STANLEY'S attempt to
bring the Irish people again under the yoke of
the Orangemen has already wasted the best part
of a week. All last night was occupied in stir-
ring up the worst passions of different sects of
religionists; possibly six more will be devoted
to the same sacred purpose ; and after all
this endless palaver the two questions
will remain as they were at the commence-
ment of the Session. While these disgraceful
proceedings are going on as it were in
mockery of the people, the Government
either will not or cannot undertake measures
of Vital importance to the country. These
must be taken up by some individual
Member whose labours are seldom duly
appreciated, either because he is supposed to
bring them forward to suit some local interests,
or has not sufficient weight with either of the
contending parties to carry them into effect.
The important question which Mr. RicE, the
Member for Dover, is to bring on this even-
ing, is one of this description. If any one
measure of the Session more than another
belongs to the department of Government
it is certainly that for calling the atten-
tion of Parliament to the Report of their
(WM eq
rYnnisioner, on the State of the Harbours
0-0 Ow Sotith-t.:,,,tgrn 0! E.0,1.0td.
than twelve months have elapsed since the Re-

•