The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-23 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT
HOUSE OF LORDS, June 22.

BISHOPRIC OF MANCHESTER, &c., BILL.

On the order of the day for going into Committee on
this Bill being read,
The Bishop of EXETER said that it was with con-
siderable pain to himself that he felt bound to oppose the
further progress of this Bill. He was unwilling to make
a motion, and would, therefore, content himself by say-
ing that the Bill did not meet with his approval in its
present state.
After a few words from Lord BROUGHAM, with
respect to the law, as it related to the appointment of
Spiritual and temporal Peers,
The LORD CHANCELLOR agreed with his Noble
and Learned Friend in the opinion he had expressed
upon the proposal of the Right Reverend Prelate.
The House then went into Committee.

On the 2d clause being proposed,
Lord REDESDALE rose to move the amendment of
which he had given notice, namely, " And whereas
doubts may arise whether bishops of the
new sees to be established under the powers of this Act,
may not demand, as of right, writs of summons to Par-
liament, be it enacted, pursuant to the declaration of her
Majesty, herein before recited, that until her Majesty
shall be graciously pleased to summon to Parliament
any bishop holding one of the said sees, no bishop
holding that see shall be entitled to demand,
as of right, a writ of summons to Parliament."
It was always hitherto contended that where a Peerage
was conferred a right to be summoned to Parliament
was also conferred, and they had always obtained in
this country, except when the powers of this House were
destroyed by a republican Government.
The Marquis of LANSDO bVNe, was understood to
oppose the insertion of the clause. He considered that
the spiritual Peers sat in the House under totally dif-
ferent circumstances from the temporal Peers ; in their
case the right to the peerage did not descend from father
to son as was the case with the other Peers.

Lord STANLEY thought that the mode in which this
new bishop was to be appointed was most objectionable,
inasmuch as it would be an obstruction upon the prero-
gative of the Crown, but it was more than this—it was
an invasion of their rights, whether spiritual or tem-
poral.—(Hear, hear.) Independently of this objection
in point of principle, it was also objectionable with
respect to those other bishops who were to be at a future
day appointed. If, however, new bishops were to be
appointed he considered that they must be appointed in a
different mode, and under different circumstances, but
if the plan of the Bill were carried out, many of the
young talented members of the Church would be ex-
cluded from seats on the Bench. Besides establishing a
dangerous precedent, it was seriously interfering with
the prerogative of the Crown ; and he hoped, therefore,
their Lordships mould pause before they rejected the
amendment of his Noble Friend. They were called
upon to establish Baronies without seats in that House,
and he thought the principle was most dangerous and
unwise. Just as well might they be asked to pass a
Bill, restricting the number of Marquises who should
hold seats in that House. The Bishops of Exeter and
Salisbury had just as much right to seats in that House
as the Marquis of Exeter or the Marquis of Salisbury,
and their Lordships had no legal right to deprive any
Bishop of a seat in that House. For these reasons he
certainly should give his support to the motion of his
Noble and Learned Friend. _ _

The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the difficulty
really was not whether there should be a new bishopric
founded, but whether he should have a seat in the House.
It had been objected to :this measure as an undue in-
terference with the rights of the Crown, of the Right
Rev. Prelates, and the whole of the temporal Peers be-
sides. He was at a loss to account how these results
could follow from the passing of this Bill. Was the
House prepared to say that every new Bishop should
have a seat in the House, without regard to the numbers
to be appointed, or would their Lordships allow that
proper spiritual superintendence to be afforded to the
country, which was so much needed, by proper and effi-
cient persons, who would not have a seat in that House ?
Those were the only two courses which he saw ope❑ for
the house to adopt. Ho thought that the Bill was one
which met the difficulties of the whole case, and he
thought that it was one which was entitled to receive
their Lordships support.
The Marquis of BUTE said that ho felt reluctantly
compelled to oppose the further progress of the measure,
and he should give his support to the amendment of his
Noble Friend.

The Bishop of EXETER said that in his opinion the
present Bill would have the effect of placing a restraint
upon the prerogative of the Crown, in the creation of
new Bishops.
The Bishop of LONDON said as they might expect
him, as one of the Commissioners appointed by her
sssajesty to carry out her Majesty's recommendations
with respect to the appointment of new bishops, to say a
few words, he would do so. He was ready to take his
share in the blame which might attach to those who had
proposed this Bill. His Noble and Learned Friend (the
Bishop of Exeter) said that the right of a bishop to be
summoned to that House was created at the time of his
investure ; but the right existed as well with respect to
young as to old bishops. There was considerable weigh i;
in the objections made by the Noble Lords ; but then
those from whom the Bill emanated had to deal with
great difficulties, and they chose what appeared to them
to be the best. After detailing the circumstances which
had led to the introduction of the Bill, the Right
Reverend Prelate proceeded to say, that he was
of opinion that bishops, after they were ordained,
should reside some years in their diocese before
they came to the metropolis. There ought
always to be a sufficient number of bishops to represent
the church ; but he did not think so large a number of
new bishops should be appointed, as many Noble Lords
seemed to suppose, because he thought that a bishop, by
the aid of archdeacons, might be enabled to accomplish
great good in his diocese. Upon these grounds he felt
it his duty to support the Bill.
Lord REDESDALE considered that the clause would
prove dangerous to the prerogative of the Crown, and
therefore he should vote for its rejection.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and their
Lordships divided:—
For the amendment

Against it
Majority against the amendment —3o
The Bishop of OXFORD then proposed the insertion
of a clause (the purport of which did not reach the
gallery) which was agreed to without a division.
The Bishop of SALISBURY, on clause 3 being pro-
posed, moved an amendment regulating the rights and
immunities of the deans and chapters in connexion with
cathedral establishments of the old foundation.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE rose to state the rea-
sons why he objected to the amendment proposed, but
the Noble Lord spoke in so low a tone of voice that he
could not be heard in the gallery.
The clause was then agreed to.
The other clauses were then agreed to.
The following Bills were then read a third time:—
Great Southern and Western Railway Extension (Por-
tarlington to Tullamore).
Dublin and Drogheda Railway (Branch from Navan to

_
Kells). _
Glasgow, Barrhead and Neilston Direct, and Glasgow
Southern Terminal Railway Amalgamation.
Glasgow, Barrhead and Neilston Direct Railway.
Macduff Harbour Improvement.
Southampton and Dorchester Railway.
Eastern Counties Railway (Maldon, Witham and Brain-

tree Railway purchase).
Norfolk Railway (Yarmouth Extension).
Norfolk Railway (Wymondham Branch).
Great Western Railway (Branch to join London and
South-Western Railway at Lambeth).
Swansea Valley Railway.
Lowestoft Railway and Harbour (Alteration near Read-
haveu).
Dundee and Perth Railway (Inchture, Polgrave and
Inchmichael Branches).
The other Bills were forwarded a stage, and their
Lordships adjourned at a quarter past Eight o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 22.
COPPER DUTIES.

Mr. ASHLEY presented a petition signed by 11,000
working men of the county of Cornwall, in relation to
the copper duties, and moved that it be printed with the
votes.

. _
Mr. MUNTZ then rose to move " That the House
resolve itself into a Committee of Customs, to consider
the duties upon the importation of copper (Act 5 and 6
Vic., c. 47), with a view to their reluction or
abolition." He said that previous to 1829 a large
quantity of copper ore was usually smelted in
South America. The quantity, however, was
reduced by a wise alteration of the law in relation to the
importation of that article. But another alteration was
made in the law in 1842 prejudicial to the importation
of ore into this country, so that in 1843 the
quantity imported was 19,829 tons, in 1845
10,600 tons, and in 1846 13,000 tons. The
manufacture this country was actually being super-
seded, and this was the case in the town which he re-
presented ; therefore:it became a very serious matter
for the consideration of this House. Now it was
a fact that France had imported 1,600 tons of copper into
South America andsmuggling was going on to a great ex-
tent into Adelaide. The Hon. Member then read a letter
from Valparaiso, which stated that a great improve-
ment was going on with respect to this article.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving that the House
resolve itself into Committee, to consider the duties
upon the importation of copper, with a view to their re-
duction or abolition.

Mr. EWART most heartily seconded the motion;
for this was a matter of too much importance to the
mercantile marine to be neglected, and he, therefore,
concurred in the views of the Hon. Member for Bir-
mingham.

Sir CHARLES LEMON thought that this inquiry
was one which was quite unnecessary, for it had, by no
means been satisfactorily proved that the new plan was
better than the old one, for the only proof they had of
it was the existence of a report to the judicial Committee
and the unsupported assertions of those who were in-
terested in the promotion of the use of the invention.
He would quote another simple instance to show that
duty upon copper ore was a new tax. The Hon. Gentle-
man then read several lengthened extracts from the blue
book, which he said were of a nature to mislead the
public. It had been said, and it was true, that there
had been a rise in the price of copper during the last
year. But why ? Because there had been a consider-
able falling off in the production of the foreign mines,
and of the mines at home ; also what was said of the
discovery of coal in America, was an old subject. It was
as great
iwneellxtkennotwans
tt
hhea tfi therei
nw
Ee rneg
lcaonadl
Scotland,
tlAmerica,an
d and
But he would not occupy the time of the House un-
necessarily. All he would ask of the House was, that
before any change was introduced, some inquiry should
be made, and some reason shown that injury would not
succeed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he