The Sun.
London, England, 1840-06-30 00:00:00

PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH

(SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the motion of the Archbishop of CANTER-
BURY this Bill was read a third time and passed.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from mem-
bers of the Church of England, praying for an alteration
in the Liturgy.
The Bishop of EXETER moved for certain returns
connected with the expenses of the police.
NON-INTRUSION.

The Marquis of BREADALBANE in presenting.
several petitions in favour of Non-Intrusion, said that
the number of signatures attached to petitions in favour
of Non-Intrusion amounted to 166,734, while those
to petitions in favour of Intrusion amounted only
to 4,161; from tins their Lordships might gather

EDITION.

what was the gentZal feeling in Scotland on
the subject. The Noble Marquis then presented a
petition from the Kirk Session of Doddington, and
another from Forfar, complaining of the desecration of
the Sabbath by the running of mails on that day.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said, with reference to
the enumeration of the signatures to the Pe,titions on
the subject of Non-Intrusion, that nothing coold be a

more fallacious test. Among all the great improvements
which had taken place in our manufactures of Im'e years
there had been none to equal the improvement whi,^l bad
taken place in the manufacture of petitions.—(A latigh.)
The petitions to which the Noble Marquis had refereed
afforded a signal example of the perfection to which the
manufacture of petitions had been brought. He could.

give their Lordships some account of one of them, which.

lid been most numerously signed—he meant the
Edinburgh petition.—(Hear.) Among the improve—
ments in the art of petitioning, one of the
most novel, and at the same time the most effectual,,

was the employing ladies to carry about petitions and
solicit signatures. Of course, the younger and hand—
somer these ladies were the better.—(A laugh.) He
bad seen a letter from a gentleman, who stated that this
petition had been brought to his House by two ladies,
who had asked if he or his wife were at home,

and being informed they were not, the ladies sent the
petition up into the nursery, with a message stating all
in the House belonging to the Established Church
were to sign it. One servant and two children had
signed it without knowing anything further of it than they
had learned from the message. The eldest of these children
was twelve )ears of age, and the other ten. He was
far from wishing to undervalue the petitions of the
people, but he thought the unsophisticated article was
much better than the manufactured one.—(Loud
cheers and laughter.) He would not now allude
to the sophistry of the Noble Alarquis, that all
thuse signing petitions in favour of Non-Intrusion
were supporters of the monstrous pretengians of that
Assembly. He (the Earl of Aberdeen) would have no
objection to sign .a petition in favour of non-intrusion,
although he was decidedly opposed to the claims of
that Assembly. The Noble Earl then presented se-
veral petitions in favour of his Bill.
The Marquis of BREAD ALBANE said, that not-
withstanding the statement of the Noble Earl as to the
manufacture of petitions, he could assure their Lord-
ships that there was one general feeling throughout
Scotland in favour of Non-Intrusion ; and the very an-
nouncement of the Noble Earl that these. petitions were
to be found in nurseries, and that ladies were engaged in
procuring signatures, showed that that feeling existed
in
,lie inmost recesses of every domestic establishment.-
-(A laugh.) In almost all petitions some legal remedy
bad been asked for, and yet the Noble Earl took credit
to himself that his Bill made no alteration in the enist-

ing law.
IRISH MUNICIPAL REFORM BILL.
On the reading of the Order of the Day for the
House going into Committee upon the Municipal Cor
porations (Ireland) Bill,
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose to wove
t`,e postponement of the order.
Lord LYNDHURST asked did the Noble Marquis
mean to oppose the motion that the House go into
Committee upon the Bill ?
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY replied that
he did so intend. Up to the present time he bad not
thought it became him to oppose the progress of th 3 Bill.
But after the unanswered and unanswerable spee:thes
which he had heard delivered at the bar of that Hon:vv.,
he could not, as a landed proprietor in Ireland, give his-
assent to a measure which was in itself so pernicious,
that not even the perspicuity, learning, and ingenuity of
his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst)
could render it harmless. He did not expect
that any thing which he could say would induce
their Lordships to reject the Bill altogether, but as he
had heard no answer given to the speeches of Learned
Counsel at the bar, he felt bound to oppose
it in the present stage. He had expected
to hear an answer to those arguments when the
Bill was read a second time. But the Noble Viscount
( Melbourne) did not attempt to give any answer.
He only said that, as their Lordships passed similar
Bills on two previous sessions, they were now bound
to send down this Bill also to the other House..
But he (the Marquis of Londonderry) would ask
the Noble Viscount did he act upon that principle
himself? Did he now adhere to the measure which he
had brought in in previous sessions ? Look at the ap-
propriation clause, which the Noble Viscount and his col-
leagues in the other House, declared they would not
abandon, but would resign office rather? But what was
their conduct now ? Had they not abandoned that
clause, and equally gone back from their other declara-
tions? And yet the Noble Viscount asked their Lordships
to send down this Bill, because they had done so in two
previous session. Were not the circumstances of
Ireland altered since ? Various Acts of Parliament
had been passed for that count' y since : and the
power engrossed by one man, had greatly increased.
That individual bad sent to every Member of both.
Houses of Parliament, and to every gentlemen, and every
tradesmen, and farmer in Ireland, a deta.'led ac-
count of his plan for effecting the repeal of the
Union. He (Lord Londonderry) agreed with
their Lordships, that all this was perfectly abstwd ;
but he asked their Lordships, would they give greater
powcr to such a man ? would they give
an ascendancy to the Catholic party in Ireland?
He believed it was the duty of the Government to ar-
rest the mischievous proceedings of the individual ink
question. Tho Noble Marquis concluded by expressing
his conviction that the Bill would prove most detrimen-
tal to Protestant interests in Ireland.

Lord LYNDHURST said that, from the compli-
cated nature of the Bill, he believed it would be most
convenient to their Lordships that he should pursue the
same course upon that occasion which he had formerly
Acne—that was, to refer successively to the amend-
ments which it was his intention to move in Committee,
and without the adoption of which he was persuaded.
their Lordships would never consent to allow the Bill.
to pass into a law. He would occupy as little of their.
Lordships' time as would be consistent with the facts he.
was about to lay before them. He would not say a
single word on the principle of the Bill, or with respect
to the effects which it would be likely to pro-
' duce on the Protestant interest or the Protestant
Church in Ireland, or with respect to the feel-
ing which it had created in Ireland, or the grow-
ing distaste of the measure which, it appeared to
him, prevailed in this country. He would pass over
those topics, because it appeared to him that they
were not suitable to the present stage .of the
proceedings. He would, therefore, confine him-
self strictly to the details of the clauses, and the
amendments which it was his intention to engraft oa
the Bill. If their Lordships would look into the Bill,
there were circumstances which must strike them as
singular. They had a Bill on the same subject its
1836, another in 1837, another in 1838, and another

in 1839 ; and when all those Bills had come up from
the other House of Parliament, they had been drawn
up in the same form and. on the same model, so that it
was easy for their Lordships, in considering these mea-
sures, to see what alterations were introduced in any of
those Bills, and where their Lordships might apply a
remedy in their provisions. But in the present Bill a
new hand had been at work, and the whole Bill had
been recast—with what view or object it was difficult
to ascertain, unless it was for the purpose of introduc-

ing some minute alterations—minute in appearance and

form, but which, if allowed to pass undetected, might be
productivo ofcousequences most injurious, as appeared to
him, to the interests of Ireland. Those alterations made

in the form of the Bill would also lead to some extra-
ordinary blunders, of which he would mention one or
two instances. In the 68th clause their Lordsbipe
would find that the churchwardens were liable to be in-
dicted for a misdemeanour if they did not perform the
duties imposed on them by the Bill. But he (Lord
Lyndhurst) had looked through all the clauses of .the
measure, and he had not found a single duty imposed
by it on the churchwardens. So much for the accu-
racy of the Bill on this point. In the 46th clause ho
found it was the duty of the town clerk to prepare the
lists furnished by the churchwardens, who were not, in
any part of the Act, required to furnish any lists. So
much for the accuracy with which the Bill had been
framed. He would now direct their Lordships' atten-
tey
must be familiar.
which gave freemen
atten-
tion to the amendments which it was his intention to
propose,
tawndasthe
with many
freeman'sof which
clause,ieli h
the right of voting for Members of Parliament. It
was his intention to move that the clause, as amended
in 1838, be restored to the present Bill. That was
briefly the effect of the amendment he meant to move.
He would remind their Lordships, that on that occa-
sion the Noble Viscount said their Lordships did
not know what the purport of the amendment
was, and that they were merely the agents of
some one behind the curtain. He could assure
the Noble Viscount that there was no foundation for
such a statement, and that the only object they had in
view was to secure to the freemen the rights they at pre-
sent enjoyed. If the Bill passed into a law as it at present
stood, it would be a direct infraction of the provisions
of the Reform Bill, by virtue of which the freemen
could transmit their right by birth or marriage to other
parties. Now the present freemen were Protestants,
and the right could by birth or marriage be transmitted
to Protestants ; whereas servitude, which was distinctly
excepted, would enable Roman Catholics to obtain the
freedom of these corporations. There were a large
class of freeman connected with the different guilds, and
who, by birth, marriage, or servitude, had an inviolate
right to the freedom of the corporation, and it was a
matter of course, with very few exceptions indeed, to
admit them. All that class of persons were absolutely
excluded from the right of voting if the clause wl s
allowed to pass in its present shape, atd
that he trusted would be a sufficient mo-
tive with their Lordships to vote in favour of the
amendment which it was his intention to submit to them.
The next point to which he would direct their atten-
tion was, the boundary clause. In many towns theie
were large rural districts attached to the counties of towns.
The Bill excluded these districts from the towns.
When the Bill came up from the other House last
Session, it was provided that, for purposes of Grand