The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-20 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 19.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.
Lord BEAUMONT presented 100 petitions against
the Government plan of education from several places.
MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS.
A Messenger from the Commons brought up several
Bills, which were read a first time, and ordered to be
printed.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions from
Norwich, praying for the alteration of the law of
BStt mint.
The NOBLE DUKE also presented a petition from
Sussex, praying for the repeal of the malt-tax.
IRISH DISTRESS.
Earl GREY presented a dispatch from the Governor
General of Canada, stating that the sum subscribed in
the North American colonies, for the distressed Irish,
amounted to no less a sum than 33,000/.
BUSINESS OF THE SESSION.
Lord BROUGHAM gave notice of his intention to-
morrow to move an address to the Crown upon the sub..
ject of the business of the session.
LEITH HARBOUR BILL.
Lord CAMPBELL moved the third reading of the
Leith Harbour Bill, and explained its provisions at con
siderable length. He said the object of the Bill was to
empower the commissioners of the harbour to expend
the surplus of their capital on improving the harbour,
and to raise, if necessary, 125,0001. by loan, for the
same purpose. He, however, had no objection to
strike out the clause empowering the commissioners to
create additional capital to this amount, as be believed
the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Redesdele) objected to the
Bill on account of that clause. He could not, however,
consent to the re-committal of the Bill.
Lord REDESDALE said he was perfectly justified in
characterising the Bin as a "job." Why there never was
an instance of a Minister of the Crown proceeding with
a Bill to its third reading, and then consenting, for the
purpose of neutralising opposition, to withdraw the
leading clause. The Commissioners sought power to
raise far more money than they themselves admitted
they required. He moved that the Bill be read a third
time this day three months.
Bill; Lord BROUGHAM said it was a stupid, jobbing
he admitted, however, that he had not read it.
Lord CAMPBELL explained, that the Bill merely
sought power to borrow 125,000/ ; but the commissioners
could not borrow it without the consent of the Commis-
sioners of the Treasu, which was to be repaid with inte-
rest. In fact, the
commissioners might raise the money
without this Bill. The Duke
Bill
asa . of RICHMOND also characterised the
e ;
their The commissioners ought to have paid
been gallurPlit job." s funds into the Exchequer, but they had not
was z
Member foto'. Leith, because the Lord Advocate
bee arl GREY considered that the aspersions which had
cast upon those who supported the Bill, were not
cleditahle to the House—(Hear, hear)—and he believed
tit° the " vagaries" of the Noble and Learned Lord,
who admitted that he had not read a line of the Bill, and
who treated of general matters instead of the subject be-
fore the House, did much to bring the proceedings of that
louse into contempt with the country.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) But the Bill was breught in by the late Go
vernment, and the then Lord Advocate was not the
14ember for Leith, but a gentleman strongly opposed to
it on political, as well as other grounds. The reason the
Money had not been paid into the Treasury, was
because there was a dispute on the matter between
the Treasury and the commissioners. The reason his
Roble and Learned Friend had consented to withdraw
the money clause, was because the commissioners had
!41.!? Power without it, and because the drawer of the
fh.til had thought that they could not do so without it..
the thought
their Lordships would not reject the Bill on
b_F!ogiunds stated against it. The work was one of an
nt " of
a
fterSTa. GERMANS
public character.
when there opposed the Bill.
short discussion, their Lordships divided,
aPpeared—
For the third reading 26
Against it 2O
upThe'douse ajen dorityiv foided r the
on third readin —6
Mth amendment of Lord
aesdale. to the effect that the debt of the Commis-
-I.T: fliers to the Treasury of 228,374/. 9s. Bd., be taken at
atl.!;!above amount on Whit-Sunday, 1852, instead of
"bit-Sunday of the present year, when the numbers
Were—.

For the amendment
Against it
Majority for the amendment... —5
third time and After some verbal amendments, the Bill was read a
ic, passed.
üBLIC WORKS AND DRAINAGE (IRELAND)
BILL.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the third
leitcling of this Bill.
-After a few observations from the Earl of BOSSE,
The Bill was read a third time and passed.
The
the Tr Maruis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table of
-.Louse various returns.

16

MAYNOO TH COLLEGE.
thehe Earl of REDESDALE wished to know when
4 report of the visitors to Maynooth College would be
.41 on the table of the House ?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought it highly
Zsirable that the public should be made acquainted wi h
raanagetnent of the college; but the visitation had
_n'Y taken place on the 20th of June, and six weeks
LUUSt at least elapse ere the report could be ready for
delive
ry.
E HERRING FISHERIES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This Bill went through Committee after a short dis-
etssion.

NEW ZEALAND (No. 2) BILL.
On the motion of Earl GREY, the New Zealand (No.
2) Bill went thrr ugh CommitteAMe.
'°°ll REMOVAL ACT ENDMENT (No. 2)
BILL.
thLord CHURCHILL moved the second reading of
is Bill. The object of the Bill was to extend the
Peration of the Act of last session to make the settle-
Meet of paupers equal with the union.
ilititoftxertsonae observations from the Earl of STRAD
The Earl of RE DESD ALE expressed himself strongly
against the Bill, as estabiishinc, a principle highly ob.
Jeer
lonab.e ; namely, that of making the poor chargeable
011 the general funds of a union. He thought that a Bill
Ought, not to pass without full discussion, and he must,
therefore, object to it.
he The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
committed to-morrow.
COMMONS' INCLOSURE BILL.
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.
LONDON BRIDGE APPROACHES.
The London-bride Approaches (Fund) Bill was read
a third time and passed
DESTITUTE PERSONS (IRELAND) BILL (No. 3.)
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
H RATES ILL.
This Bill wasIGHWAY read a third time and passed.
MI PAY BILL.
This Bill wag readLITIA a third time and passed.
COPYRIGHT (C )LONIES) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
CONSTABULARY FORCE (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Commons amendments to the Masters in Chancery
Affidavit Offices Bill were agreed to.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION)
BILL,
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.
The other Bills on the table were forwarded a stage,
and their Lordships adjourned shortly after Eight o'clock.
411
ROUSE OF COMMONS. July 19.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly after Three o'clock.
FEVER HOSPITAL.
Mr. FORSTER presented a petition against the Fever
Hospital Bill.

RAJA OF SATTARA.
Sir J. HOBROUSE moved for a copy of soma letters
and other documents connected with the ex-Raja of
Sattara.

CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
Mr. S. OBRIEN was led to put a question to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer relative to the Charitable
Trusts Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman had on s
former occasion stated that the Lord Chancellor had
introduced a Bill into the House of Lords for the purpose
of regulating charitable trusts, but finding there was
co much opposition to the measure proceeding in
the present session, that Noble and Learned Lord
had thought it his duty to withdraw it. Now
What he wanted to know was, whether the Right Hon.
Gentleman had any objection to the Bill now being read
ft first time, in order that it might be printed, and its
provisions considered in the interval between the disso-
lution of the present and the meeting of a new Par
'lament.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the Hon. Member had, in some respects, misunder-
Stood what he bad stated on a former occasion. The
Bill had been introduced in the Lords and printed, and
he had a copy of it, which was very much at the service
of the Hon. Member.
FACTORIES BILL.
Mr. TRELAWNY wished to know from the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer whether it was his intention to
allow the present Parliament to separate without intro-
ducing a Bill to compensate properly those persons who
would work twelve hours a day in factories, which they
Were prohibited from doing by the enactments of the
Bill that had been passed in the present session.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could
119.1fc ,1 out no hope to the Hon. Member of the introduction
of itch a Bill during the present session.
LEEDS FREE GRAMMAR SCHOOL ESTATE
BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
LORDS' AMENDMENTS.
The
Lords' Amendments to the following Bills were
Vnludered and agreed to :
'nit,: burgh and Northern Railway, Saint Andrew's and
Newburgh Harbour Branches and Road Crossings
oikfewport Railway Extension).
"gc'w, Airdrie, and Monklands Junction Railway
_kowlairs Branch).
%Viraterworks (No. 2).
Bern and
Waterworks.
ilezliw iand North-Western Railway (Kenilworth to
, Branches and Extensions, &c.)
A Wolverhampton General Cemetry.
icaisTANT SURGEONS IN THE NAVY.
TY.A.ELEY inquired whether it was the intention

THE

of the Admiralty to afford greater facilities to the as-
sistant surgeons on board of ship for the purpose of
study than they possessed at present.
Mr. WARD said the assistant-surgeons had as many
facilities for this purpose as the other professional young
men on board ship. The Board of Admiralty were
of the same opinion, and they did not intend to make any
alteration.
Mr. WAKLEY said he should feel it his duty next
session, when the navy estimates were before the House,
to bring the subject under its attention, and to propose
that greater facilities should be afforded to them for
pursuing their studies alone on board ship.
BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER BILL.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
On the motion for going into Committee,
Mr. ESCOTr rose. He thanked the Noble Lord for
his courtesy in postponing the debate until to-day. He
called upon those who were opposed to the measure not to
be daunted because they had been beaten—he called upon
them not to shrink from giv;ng the measure all the opposi.
:ion in their power. As yet the members of the Govern-
ment had spoken but sparingly on the subject. Thee
had not argued this question at all—whether the fact o'
there being a surplus of money for church property
justified the creation of another bishopric.—(llear.)
He should like to know from the Noble Lord who repre-
,ented a part of Yorkshire (Lord Morpeth) what were
the sentiments of the people of that county on the
,übject. He had not spoken, but he could
tell him that not all the blood of the Howard,
could cram four new Bishops down the throats
of the people.—(Hear, hear.) Now, there was the
Honourable Gentleman the Member for Sheffield
(Mr. Ward), he should like to know if Sheffield was
in favour of the Bill ?-1-Mr. Ward said that his con-
stituents had not said one word on the matter.] Thet
the lion. Gentleman assumed that silence gave consent.
Mr. Ward—" No, no, I have not said a word on the
matter."]—(Laughter.) Oh ! then "silence did not give
censent !"—(Hear.) But no one more strenuously sup
ported the appropriation clause than the lion. Gentle-
man, and was a greater advocate of the liberties and of
the education of the people. He was at a loss to knoe
on what ground he supported this Bill, when the fabric
tottered with the weight which had been placed upon it
already.—(Hear.) But he saw another Hon. Gentleman
—(Laughter)—the Hon. and Learned Member for Dun-
garvon (Mr. Sheil).—(Hear, hear.) He wished to know
his sentiments.—(Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman had
been borne down this session by the encumbrance of his
office as Master of the Mint.—(Hear, hear.) There
was a time when his time and his talents
were devoted to the promotion and protection of the
liberties of the people.—(Hear, hear.) He should like
to know from him if Ireland was in favour of the Bill.—
(Hear, hear.) But he saw another Hon. Gentleman—a
Member of the Government—the Right Hon. Member
for Edinburgh—(Hear, and laughter, caused by the
Right Honourable Gentleman sitting forward '
and taking off his hat.) He came to the Right
Honourable Gentleman, and he would ask him if
Edinburgh—if Scotland was in favour of the
creation of four new bishops. He had read the able
essays of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and he had
read and heard the speeches ,he had made in Par-
liament, but he recollected nothing in either which would
justify him in supporting this Bill. He called upon him
to state the grounds on which be supported it.
He would address himself to another member
of the Government, the Attorney-General ; he
wished to ask him whether it was constitutional,
whether it was respectful to express the sentiments of
the Sovereign in the preamble of this Bill. But if he
wanted an argument in favour of the opposition to the
Bill, he might refer to the Weekly Chronicle, an able
and intelligent journal, of which the Hon. Gentleman,
the Member for Sheffield, was the proprietor. He was
happy to turn from the Members of the Govern-
ment, who supported the Bill, to the Right
Hon. Baronet, the Member for Dorchester (Sir
J. Graham), who was opposed to it. But where
was the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamwortb
(Sir R. Peel)? Why was he not in his place to state his
views and those of his constituents on the Bill? Surely
he would be better doing this than addressing pamphlets
to his constituents. He was at a loss to understand how
the Noble Lord the Member for Shropshire (Lord
Clive) could support the Bill. Certainly, under such
circumstances, Earl Powis ought to be Chancellor of
the University of Cambridge instead of Prince Albert
He was anxious also to hear the Hon. Gentleman the
Recorder of London (Mr. Law) state his reasons for
supporting the Bill. But he wished to address himself
also to those who aspired to be leaders of the Country
Party, though he might mention in passing that the
country did not support them.—(Hear.) Where was
the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn (Lord G. Ben-
tinck) ?—(Hear.) He called upon him to state his rea-
sons. Did the Bentincks come from the "Low countries"
for the put pose of supporting four new bishops ?
Was it for the purpose of creating four " Brummagem
mitres," as the successors of land, that his ancestor came
over with William?—(Hear, hear.) But where was the
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Shrewsbury (Mr.
Disraeli)?—(Hear, hear.) He was busily engaged ad-
dressing the farmers of Buckinghamshire—he was
riding on John Hampden's sacidle through that county;
but he wanted to know from him how his support of the
Bill was consistent with popular principles?—(Hear.)
Would some friend of his tell him how the creation of
tour new bishops was consistent with liberal principles?
fie would tell the House and the public why they did
not rise in their places and defend their votes. They
knew that division lists were not much looked
it in the country.—(Hear, hear.) They knew
that they were not printed in country newspapers.
The expense of these new bishops would have to be paid
by the hard-working clergy of the Church, and he there-
fore denounced the measure as unjust and uncalled for.
Let the House remember the objections that were once
raised against putting the Church into commission, and
bear in mind the manner in which those objections were
overcome. The leaders of the popular party were
told by the then Government that the measure
was proposed by them for the benefiting of the
working clergy, and upon that understanding,
and through the aid of those arguments, the
measure was allowed to pass. Had that understanding
been carried out? Did this measure carry it out ? No
such thing; and again he denounced it as an act of in-
justice towards the people, and an act of breach of faith
towards that House.—(Hear, hear.) Suppose the estates
of some of the aristocracy of the country had been put
in commission for the purpose of raising a fund for
relieving the wants of the poor, and when a surplus
fund had been raised by that means, it was pro-
posed to devote them to the support of addi-
tional Lords of the Treasury, what would have been
said of such conduct ? Could it have been denounced in
language too strong or too severe ? And yet that was
just the case here ; and, considering that a majority of
the whole House had never expressed any opinion
upon this Bill, he felt it to be his duty to persevere in
the opposition that had been raised against it.—(Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord might prorogue on Thursday,
but on Thursday he should not pass this Bill.—(Hear.)
He concluded, by moving as an amendment, that the
other orders of the day be now read.
Sir WILLIAM MOLES WORTH seconded the
amendment.
Mr. AGLIONBY wished to allude to a point
which had been touched upon in the course of this de-
bate. The Bishops of London and St.. Asaph stated,
before
the Commissioners appointed by that House to
inquire into this subject, that it was highly advantageous
to keep up the distinction between the episcopal and
ecclesiastical funds, because the Church wanted provi-
sion for more bishops. He thought thatevidence bore upon
the present question, and he hoped the House would not
lose sight of it in deciding this Bill. The Bishop of St.
Asaph's opinion was, that if more bishops were created
they would be enabled to induce the laity to subscribe
towards a charitable fund for increasing the number of
poor working clergy.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. lIUME said if the spirit and feeling of the
Bishop of London were to be taken as the spirit and
feeling of the bishops generally, he did fear there was
no hope for improving the poor working clergy of this
country. But if they were to create these new bishops,
or to establish colonial bishops, why did they
not give St. Andrew's, Edinburgh, and Glasgow
bishops ?—(Hear, hear.) He regretted that the Noble
Lord had not come down to the House stating that he
was prepared entirely to withdraw, or at least to post-
iabpagenosnatnienob tssrhte.
breath,
ttehqh
,uef
oealstcnt ioidotnntthinnet
hiul
seal
hn hisote huee next session of Parliament,
boundenshould, therefore,
this dßui tt resistor(oHn
gealyrpthrooe theaterß. ;
lie implored the Noble Lord for his own.ll "
sake to post-
pone the Bill till another session. Then, if they still saw
it necessary to press it, let them bring it forward in the
beginning of the session, so that the measure would at
least have the benefit of ,a
full consideration. He was
anxious that the opinion of the country should be taken
upon this subject; moderation would be the better means
oshfethelaetrgpyowwehr
ot preserving his wnpower, than by an arbitrary exercise
the opinions and pushs:rishotoreall a Bill through Parliament against
few
weryees of the people. Of the mass of
proposed to add to tehl
attendedd to the religious wants of
tnowhe people,prop
adequately paid ; and yet it was
bishops—to add to those whoenumber of luxuriously paid
were now rolling in their
carriages in the midst of
ya (greased and starving popu-
protest against pro-
lation. He did on ev,erhenausuentdh
"Ilear hear,,, ,Ivere now wasting
from the Opposi-
tion.) with this Bill
the time' ofati;;etrouse to prevent
theton. timel of
wasft he
wasting House.—(
antei introductionh of
trusted that
a greater waste. He considered that
this Bill was a breach of public faith
the Bill would be sent to join so man'y of thee
had been brought in this session.—(Laughter )1111 which
Lord J. RUSSELL could not but think, after hearing
the speech of the Hon. Member who had just sat down,
that the present opposition arose from a misapprehension'
of the question. The Hon. Member seemed to represent
that the ecclesiastical measures generally introduced by
her Majesty's Government had for their object the in-
crease of the resources of the hierarchy, while they,
depressed those who had more immediately the cure of
souls, But he would remind the Honourable Member
that when this Commission was appointed many
of the higher clergy held pluralities and other
means of emolument, which did not now exist. The
Commission applied its attention to this state of things.
incomes
of applied themselves in the first place to the
of the bishops, and it appeared to them that the fact
that the bishops held many amounts for the purpose of
eking out their salaries was a considerable abuse, and
they thought that by reducing the salaries of the better
paid bishops, so as to equalise the emoluments of the
different diocesans, without trenching on other funds, it
appeared to them that by this mode of equalisation the
, efficiency of the Church might be greatly increased ;
and in this way the emoluments of the bishopric
of Durham had been reduced from 22,0001. to 8,0001.
Then they thought that the number of deans and canons
might be greatly reduced, and by such means they found
au amount per annum of 134,000 L, but owing to the
better management of property, this amount was in-
creased to 300,000/. Now, to what purpose was this
sow to be applied? It was to be devoted to