The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-05 00:00:00

A RT-UNIONS.

Lord MONTEAGLE, in moving the second reading of the
Art-Unions pill, said the object of this Bill was to render the
temporary Bill of last session a permanent measure, the change
being suggested, not only by the necessities of the ease, but
was urged by the petitions of Mr. Mulready, Mr. Stansfield,
Mr. Grant, anti several others of eminent standing as artists.
There was every reason that this measure should be passed.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordercd to be
committed on Monday.
PROTESTANT ASSOCIATIONS.

The Earl of RADNOR begged to bring under the notice
of their Lordships the case of Mr. Shore, who had been ci►ed
in the Ecclesiastical Courts by the Bishop of Exeter. The
Noble Lord, who was exceedingly inaudible in the gallery,
read a lengthened correspondence respecting the alleged terms
of agreement The chapel was to be endowed, but the Bishop
reserved to himself the right of approving-the endowment of
the chapel, to which Mr. Shore, and afterwards Mr. Brown,
had been appointed, and that explained the correspondence
between the Duke of Somerset and the Bishop's secretary. The
Noble Lord then read a letter from a gentleman in the neighbour-
hood of Bridgetown, showing his assent, provided the Duke
would endow the chapel and the Bishop would consecrate it.
The Duke ultimately declined to endow, and the Bishop of
course to consecrate, and he believed that a Noble and Learned
Lord was about to present a petition on the subject. He re-
gretted that the Noble Duke was not himself present to rebut
the accusations which had been made against him in his ab-
sence, and which were perfectly groundless, and with this state-
ment he would leave it to the House.

The Bishop of BATH and WELLS read a letter from the
Bishop of Exeter to himself, to justify the Duke of Somerset
from bad faith in not endowing the chapels, which he had cast
upon him at Exeter; and also a copy of the Bishop's letter to
Lord Radnor, stating the reasons why he did not appear in
the House of Lords. They were as follows :—Lord Seymour,
who was eldest son bf the Duke of Somerset, had called a
public meeting by handbill to justify his father among his
constituents at Totness. This afforded one cause, but
another arose from his being engaged in legal proceedings
again,t Mr. Shore. The Right R d Prelate also
read another letter from the Bishop of Exeter to Lord Sey-
mour calling on him to justify his allegations against himself.
The reply was, that Lord Seymour declined all communication
with the Bishop of Exeter, and that lie was not disposed to read
the Western Times.
JOINT.STOCK BANKS (SCOTLAND AND IRE-
LAND) BILL.
The Earl of EGLIN TON, after presenting a petition from
Scotland t:gainst the Bill, said he must earnestly request tl.e
Government to pospone the Bill till next session. In the early
part of the present session a deputation from Scotland waited
upon Sir R. Peel upon the subject of this Bill, and that Right
Hon. Baronet promised to re-consider the measure before
he pressed it forward. They had been in hopes, therefore, that
when the present Government came into office, the Bill would
I.ave been postponed for the present, but it was not to be so;
and the Bill had just come up to their Lordships' House
from the House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.) He, however,
asked as a favour for Scotland, whose interests were bound
up in this Bill, that it might be put off till next session.
There were 18 joint-stock banks in Scotland, 5 have charters,
and 13 have not. The 13 banks which had not charters
were equally safe with those which had. But the five
which possessed charters, had certainly an • advantage
over the others, and the present Bill was for the purpose of
ena._ ling the unehartered to becomeso. But if they took advan-
tage of this Bill they would lose the power of lending money to
their shareholders upon the security of their shares, a most impor-
tant advantage which the old chartered banks would still retain;
besides their charter was only granted for a period of twenty
years, and required that the accounts should be made up in a
most invidious manner. A Bill for a similar purpose had
been passed in the year 1844 for English banks, but there
was only one bank that availed itself of the advantages which
it conferred; and he had authority for stating that not one
bank in Scotland would avail themselves of the powers granted
by the Bill, in which he recognised the principle of
centralisation, which was such a favourite of Sir Robert
Peel, and which he considered a most vicious principle.
He could not conceive that those who adopted free trade prin-
ciples could countenance such a monopoly as the banks of
Scotland. Under these circumstances he must earnestly beg
her Majesty's Government would not allow the further con-
tinuance of this banking monopoly, or at all events postpone
this Bill till another session.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he thought it
would be improper at that late period of the session
to urge on Government any measure which was nut known
to the public. But the present measure was not in
that position. It was understood by the other House
of Parliament, and the present Government had received a
deputation from the chartered bankers of Scotland. Some
of the Glasgow bankers had certainly opposed the measure.
The bankers of Scotland, however, subsequently gave their
acquiescence in the Rill.
1 he Earl of KINNAIRD regretted to hear that the Bill
was to be pressed forward this session. It was not only a
banker's question but a landlord's question. It was modi-
fied on one occasion before, and be understood that
it would not be pressed forward without due notice being
given. He knew, from what he had seen and heard, that the
feeling expressed at county meetings was very much against
it. The chartered banks were in favour of the Bill, and they
were so because they knew that it would deprive many or all
of the unchartered banks from the advantages which they them-
selves possessed.
Earl GREY said that it would be better to postpone the
discussion until they came to the second reading. If the
Bill was to pass, it was important, that it should do so with
as little delay as possible.—( Hear.) He should, therefore.
suggest that it should be made an order of the day, to
be read a second time on Thursday, and the merits
of the Bill then discussed. He should then he able to show
his Noble Friend that there were reasons for passing the Bill
of which be (the Earl of Kinnaird) was not aware.
The Bill was then read a first time, and ordered to be read
a second time on Thursday.
IRISH MARRIAGE ACT.
On the motion of Lord CAMPBELL, the Amended Irish
Marriage Act was read a second time.
ARGYLL CANAL BILL.

Upon the tLird reading of this Bill being moved
The Earl of WICKLOW proposed as an amendment, that
it be recommitted on the ground of the Committee not having
entertained the petition of certain shareholders against the Bill.
After a few words from Lore.s Redesdale, Beaumont,
Shaftsbury, Campbell, and Monteagle, the Bill was read a
third time and passed.
PUBLIC BATHS AND WASHHOUSES BILL.

After a few words from the Marquis of LANSDOWNE and
the Earl of RADNOR, the several clauses of the Public Baths
and Washhouses Bill went through Committee. The repert
was brought up and ordered to be received to-morrow.
SOUTH DEVON RAILWAY ( AMENDMENT AND
BRANCHES).
The report upon this Bill was brought up and received.
POOR REMOVAL BILL. _

Lcrd GREY gave notice that on Thursday next, he would
move the second reading of the Poor Removal Bill.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned until Thursday.