The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-12 00:00:00

and scarcity of food was to be found in the fact that
wheat was quoted at 120 s. a quarter. At the same time,
however, that he feared there was a great deficiency in
the country, he was by no means of opinion that the
Government should impose restrictions upon the export
of grain.—(Hear).
Lord BROUGHAM said that nothing could be more
ungenerous than attempts to conceal the fact of any scar-
city of food existing in the country. Had timely notice
been given, it might have prevented a dearth from be-
coming a famine, by putting all classes of the commu-
nity upon their guard. Much credit was due to the
Noble Earl for having drawn attention to the subject.
He agreed it would be extremely undesirable to inter-
fere with the export trade, by attempting which he
thought they would under present pressure defeat the
very object they had in view.
SOUP KITCHENS (IRELAND.)
Earl FITZ WILLIAM wished to know if the Govern-
ment were in possession of information of how far the
Act, known in Ireland as the Soup Kitchen Act, had
been put in operation ?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, who was nearly in•
audible in the gallery, was understood to say that the
Government were not in posessiun of that positive infor-
mation which would justify them in laying it before the
House.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE proceeded to state
(but in a very indistinct tone) the substance of various
amendments which it was proposed to introduce into the
Bill. One was with the view of extending the power of
the Commissioners in granting loans under the Bill for
such works as might be conidered necessary and es-
sential to be executed.
After a few words from Lord NIONTEA.GLE,_

the 21st inst., he would move the adjournment of the
House for the holidays till Friday the 28th.
HERITABLE PROPERTIES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Sir ANDREW LEITH HAY presented a petition
from Inverary against the Heritable Property (Scot-
land) Bill.
MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS BILL.

Sir JAYIES GRAHAM presented a petition against
the Medical Practitioners Bill.
POOR REMOVAL BILL.::LAW OF SETTLE-

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, with reference'
to an amendment proposed by the Noble Duke opposite I
on the subject of the p iyment for labour by wages and
not by land, he had been anxious to frame a clause as,
much as possible to meet the views of the Noble Duke.
But from what he heard it appeared that it would be
impossible to carry the principle into effect in every in-
stance. The Noble Marquis then briefly stated the
terms of the amendments by which he hoped to meet the
suggestion made.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said the object which
he had in proposing the clause would be obtained under
the Bill, that object having been to produce a general
alteration throughout the country by means of an enact-
ment of that description. His opinion was that a great
part of the evil which at present existed had been
caused by the payment for labour being made by por•
tions of land instead of in money. If the present evil
had not been occasioned by that practice it had been in-
creased by it, and he was certain that the evil had been
uniformly aggravated by it. But, great as the evil was,
it had occurred on a variety of occasions within the last
fifty years, and it had always been remedied and re-
moved by the interference of the Government. The pre-
sent evil was greater at this moment an Ireland than in
any part of the world, and it was principally on those
very grounds that the Government was obliged to inter-
fere to alleviate it. What he had wished to do was to
avail himself of the present measure, in which, in order
to apply a remedy to the existing evil, Parliament had
offered to the landed proprietors and occupiers in that
country the means of distributing large capitals; he
wished, he repeated, to avail himself of that opportunity
of putting an end to practices which, in his opinion, were
so fatal to the prosperity of that country. Ile was much
obliged to his Noble Friend for the manner in which he
proposed to adopt words in the Bill to meet his wishes;
but he believed, when they came to examine the ar-
rangements proposed by that clause, they would find
that it would not attain all the objects he had in view,
until the labourers were paid in Ireland as they were in
every other country in the world, by daily wages, instead
of by land. the mode in which they were now paid. Such
a system was not practised in any other country in the
world except in Ireland, and that was the reason that it
suffered ten times more now than ever was suffered by
any other country.—(Hear.)
The Marquis of WESTMEATH said there could be
no doubt that the mismanagement cf land in Ireland
had done much to bring that country into its present
condition. One way to put an end to the conacre sys-
tem would be to make the rents not recoverable by law.
The amendment, with one or two others, was then
agreed to, and the report was received.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table the
annual report of the Poor-law Commissioners.
The House adjourned at Half-past Eight.

MENT.

Mr. MILES presented petitions against the Poor
Removal Act of last session, and praying for the aboli-
tion of the law of settlement, and the enactment of a
national rate.
SUSPENSION OF THE NAVIGATION-LAWS.
Mr. MITCHELL wished to ask the Noble Lord at
the bead of the Treasury, whether he intended to pro-
pose a further suspension of the navigation-laws with
respect to the importation of corn, and also another
question, which he hoped the Noble Lord would not
answer, unless he had previously considered it, as it was
of very considerable importance. The question was,
whether he intended to move the suspension, of the na-
vigation-laws with respect to the importation of all other
articles of food ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said that, on an early day, he
intended to move the suspension of the Navigation Laws
with respect to corn and all other articles of food, but
that the manner in which the suspension was to be pro-
posed had not been sufficiently considered, and he
must, therefore, defer the answer to a future statement.

Earl FITZWILLIAM said that the object of his re-
turn was to ascertain the number r,f male and female
paupers who had been relieved, what had been the ex-
pense within certain periods, and what districts of the
poor-law the rates had been levied for the purpose. He
should move for those returns on Friday text.
The Earl of CLANCARTY hoped that tha Noble
Earl would include in those returns oust also of the
voluntary contributions which had been made for the
same purpose.
THREATENING LETTERS.

SANATORY STATE OF TOWNS.
Mr. AGLIONBY wished to ask a question of the Noble
Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests as to the
course which he intended to pursue with respect to the
Health of Towns Bill, as his intentions appeared not
to be understood. Did he intend to content himself
merely with reprinting the Bill, and then throw it aside,
or did he intend to proceed with any part of it during
the present session ?
Lord MORPETH said that he proposed to proceed
with a part of the Bill this session. and to apply it to
all corporate towns inEngland and Wales, and to all other
towns from which petitions had been prevented by the
rated inhabitants.
THE THETIS FRIGATE.

O❑ the motion of Lord I)ENMAN the House went
into Committee on the Threatening Letters Bill. It
passed through Committee, and the report was ordered
to be brought up on Friday.
BELGRAVE CHAPEL. _

Lord 111ONTEAGLE, in rising to present a petition
from the Rev. Dr. Thorpe on the appointment of a
chaplain to this chapel, regretted that it had not fallen
into the hands of some person more competent to do it
justice, and discarded every supposition that, in the
remarks which he might make upon the Right Rev.
Prelate, whose conduct was brought in question, he bad
' not the slightest personal feeling. Had the question
touched upon, by this petition, been of a spiritual
nature, he should not have felt it to be his duty to bring
it before their Lordships; but the question was purely of
a secular character; and, therefore, it was perfectly in
the province of a lay Lord to introduce it to the
House. The petition he had to present was
signed by a highly-respectable reverend gentleman
d t 0
00htim kwnaoswa
gentlemanpersonally,
of
undoubted
uwb
therd,,
iwrtehswopame sc
traebphirleiets;.dnittei n
Now this gentleman, on applying to a
Right Reverend l'relate for an appointment which was
at the time vacant in the church was told by that Right
Reverend Prelate that he was not eligible to the appoint-
ment, because he was an Irish clergyman. He should
not have made objection to the refusal had it been
founded upon spiritual defects in the applicant. The
Church of Ireland contained the names of some of the
most illustrious men to be found in connexion with
the churches of both countries.—(Hear, hear.) It was
too much to say that an Irishman could not
hold a curacy in London at the very time
when the Bishop placed nearly at the head of the
church of Ireland was an Englishman, who had seen
little or nothing of Ireland—(Hear, hear)—and many
Englishmen held high offices in the Irish church: it was
not unlike what the late Sir Roach Boyle had said,
namely—that all the mutuality was on one side.—
(Laughter.) When Lord Plunkett was elevated to the
bench a cabal was formed against him much similar to
the one which he was now discussing; but he overcame
it, and at the time the bar of England refused to consent
to the elevation of Lord Plunkett to the judgeship of the
Rolls Court, Sir Anthony Hart was sent over to preside
over one of the highest Equity Courts in Ireland.—
(Elear, hear.) There was no saf, ty for Ireland,
1 for one hour if the Protestant Episcopal Church of Ire
land, as specified in the Act of Union, was to be consi-
dered a separate instead of a similar and sister esta•
blishment with the Protestant Church of England. Why
the Act of Union expressly stated that the Protestant
Church of both countries should be asssimilated, and
that they should be called the United Protestant
Churches of England and Ireland. But of all times this
was the most inexpedient to endeavour to draw invidious
distinctions between the two Churches. And then no
Church had so much improved as the Irish Church dur-
ing the last five and twenty years. Still further, was this
inexpedient at a time when the Protestant clergyman
and the Catholic priest had associated together for the
purpose of assuaging the sufferings of the Irish people.
—(Hear). An objection to the difference between the
course of informal. n in the Colleges of Dublin and of
Oxford and Cambridge; though at first one might think
of some importance, could not avail, as the Night Rev.
Prelate had himself admitted that the course of religious
study in the Protestant College of Ireland was superior
to that pursued in the English Universities. He trusted
that nothing he had said might be construed into offence
towards the Right Rev. Prelate, and he concluded by
laying the petition on the table.
The Bishop of LONDON only intended to address a
few words to their Lordships, in reply to the statement
of the Noble Lord. He believed he should be able to
show that, in the course he had pursued, he had not
been ectueed by any disrespect to that branch of the
United Church whose labours were confined to Ireland.
In the first place, he begged to thank the Noble Earl
for the way in which he had introduced the subject to
their Lordships, except so far as his remarks led him to
think that he had not done justice to the church of his
country ; because no one was more willing to do justice
to the claims of that Church than he was—no pally-
genic which he could pronounce would be too high
with respect to the past conduct of the
Protestant clergy of Ireland for many years past, and
particularly during the last few months.--(Hear, hear.)
The regulation to which the p-Ction referr:d had not
been adopted by him during the last few months, or the
last few years, but was adopted 23 years ago, and this
was the first time teenplaint had bee- made of it. When
he was Bishop of Chester, he foaled the influx of Irish
clergymen into his diocese extremely great, and he dis-
ccuragt d it on more grounds than one—particularly on
two grounds—which still existed in his mind ; and they
were these: he did not think that young men educated
for the service of the Church in Ireland, should take an
early opportunity of quitting that Church, especially
under the difficulties that surrounded it at that time,
and coming over to England for the purpose of ob-
taining better pay, and less irksome duty. Looking too at
the state of «lucation in Trinity College at that time,
and its improved suite deserved the approbation of his
Noble Frien 1, he considered that he was perfectly
warranted in the course he had adopted. The practice
of taking their degrees in Ireland and immediately
coming over to England he thought extremely hard upon
the young men educated at great expense at the English
universities, an 1 that they should be misplaced from
coracles and those occupations in the Church for which
they had been educated, and prevented from obtaining
ordination by the immigration of large numbers of Irish
clergymen, th-refore he thought right to discourage
the practice ; but the rule was at no time ri-
gidly adhere I to, because he thought there were
many reasons why Irish clergymen should not come
over here, and at that moment there were as
many Irish clergymen licensed as those whom he had
refused to license. As this rule ht-d been in forced 23
years, and had, moreover, bsen published in the recog-
nised organs of the Church, it was somewhat remarkable
that it never had elicited any- remonstrance from the
clergy in his diocese ; but if his Noble Friend the Lord
Primate of Irelaed had stated that he thought such a
rule was inconsistent with the relations which should
subsist between the two Churches, and between the two
countries, he should have bowed to the wish of his Grace;
but nothing of the kind had occurre 1, yet the petitianer

Lord INGi.'STRIE wished to inquire of the Secre-
tary of the Admiralty, whether the money paid for the
use of the ships employed for the recovery of the treasure
lost in the Thetis, and what was its amount?
Mr. WARD said that the sum of 13,6721. had been
carried to the credit of the country for the use of these
ships. Ho had inquired of the Accountant-General of
the Admiralty, and had found that a sum was pa►d in
the month of September 1834, and again in 1835, and
again in 1836.

stated on his own authority that he (the Bishop

of London) • had been guilty of an intole-
rable assumption of authority. His offence alone
consisting in preventing young men from quitting that
sphere of labour for which they had been specially
ordained. The petitioner should hare brought the
matter before the heads of the Irish church, rather than
by a petition to their Lordships, which had not been
read, but which contained much stronger language than
that used by his N(,ble Friend. He (the Bishop of
London) might have acted injudiciously, hut, as he had
said, he had adopted the rule as a stringent one. This
he thought was sufficient to exonerate him from having
cast any disrespect upon the Irish church. Within the
last year or two he had conferred two or three of the most
valuable livings in his diocese on Irish clergymen. One
of the most valuable livings in connexion with St. Paul's
had been conferred by him on an Irish clergyman. But
Dr. Thorpe, by his conduct, had not rendered it neces-
sary for him (the Bishop of London) to show him any
special obl.gation. When Dr. Thorpe's curate Came to
him, he stated his objections, but he, at the same time,
intimated that as Dr. Thorpe was about to leave the
country, he might perform his dnties, and let the matter
rest until he returned ; but Dr. Thorpe, thereupon,
wrote him a letter, accusing him of' an " intolerable as-
sumption of power," and refused to consent ; but, sub-
sequently, he (the Bishop of London) found that the
curate was a fit person to be licensed, and he offered to
license him, but he thanked him for his offer, but
declined, and since that time he hal licensed many Irish
clergymen, and he should continue to do so. He begged
to thank their Lordships for the attention with which
they had listened to his explanation.
The Earl of CLANCARTY said that the Irish clergy
were men of the highest character and the most
superior intellectual attainments. Attached as he was
to the union between the two countries, he
regretted that such a distinction should have
beenmade. There hal been a great deal of talk about
unhappy
hppwy would add repeal, but he assured their Lordships there was nothing
were advanced to'°anhi
more strength to that cry than such
He therefore begged ta.
Fla situation in Ireland, but they
Englishtnen and Scotchmen
the converse of fact was true.
could not instance than
the petition which hios give_o his support to the prayer in
Lord MOlTNTCASllENLbsiaeidirthraietnidf thhaedwhoomleittbeednetbo
Right Rev. Prelates adopted the's
oa
ft aißt,eoi.g
mreunle,inthtea
would not have any Irish officiating clergymen whole of England.
Lord CAMPBELL gave notice that he 'would move„
that the House go into Committee, on the Lunatic 4131"
Bill, on Friday next, proforma.
POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
Lord ItIONTEAGLE begged to give notice that het
would ask a question of her Majesty's Government when,
the report on the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill was brought
up, as to how far it was intended that the receipt of re-
lief under the Bill should disqualify a voter. '
LANDED PROPERTY (IRELAND) BILL.
The order of the day for receiving the report oil 09
above Bill having been read,

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING,' MAY 12, 1847:

POOR RELIEF SUPERVISION (IRELAND)

BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
SERVICE OF HEIRS (SCOTLAIid)) BILL.
The report upon this Bill was brought up and
agreed to.
POOR REMOVAL (ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND)

BILL.
The report upon this Bill was also brought up and
agreed to.
CROWN (CHARTERS') SCOTLAND BILL.
The report upon this Bill was also brought up, and
agreed to.
ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a second time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS COSTS TAXATION