The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-18 00:00:00

.It SUN, LONDON, PRIDAY E

no means deserves to be left out of view or consideration
It is a state in which we may, in various cases, have
political interests to connect us, and it is a state in con-
nexion with which we have at all times commercial in-
terests closely concerned. Our commercial intercourse
with Rome, though not to be compared in extent to
what it was with many other countries, is nevertheless
annually growing and steadily increasing; and at pre-
sent the Sovereign of these realms cannot enter into any
commercial engagements or treaties with the Sovereign
of Rome, in order to afford our commerce with the Ro-
man States those securities arising from commercial
treaties which it enjoys in almost every other country
in the world. We have a great interest in accelerat-
ing the communication with our East Indian posses-
sions. That communication is daily becoming more and
more abridged by the introduction of railways into dif-
ferent parts of the continent of Europe. Now, we can-
not make use of si railway passing through the territory
of another state without some arrangement being entered
into by treaty, with regard to the transit of our mails
through that country. There is at present no railway
communication established for that purpose in Italy; but
we have no reason to doubt but that, sooner or later,
there will be a vast chain of railways formed, running
from the very extremity of Italy, and connecting it with
the Rhine, Germany, or France; and in that case our
mails will very likely pass through the Roman States.
Now, under the present state of the law, the necessary
arrangements for this purpose could not be effected, be •
cause we could not conclude with the Roman states any
convention legalising the transit of the English mails
through their territories. Sir, for these reasons, then,
briefly stated, I am at a loss to see any valid ground
upon which, in the !present state of public opinion in
Europe, it can possibly be contended that any constitu-
tional objection fairly applies to this measure, or that
any real danger is likely to arise from it; and because,
on the other hand, I hold that the existing inipossbility
of conducting political relations with the Roman Go-
vernment is now attended. and likely in future years to
be still more attended, with injury and disadvantage to
the commercial and other interests of this country, I
move, Sir, the second reading of this Bill.—(Hear.)
Mr. ANSTEY said he was much surprised at the
course pursued by the Noble Lord with relation to this
Bill. He thought he would have alluded to the circum-
stances which led to this appeal to the Legislature, and
that he would have applied his attention to the conscien
tious objections entertained against the Bill by Protest-
ants. and Catholics. He, however, left all these matters
in the dark. He, therefore, would direct his remarks to
the speeches which had been delivered in another
place.
The title of this Bill was " to enable her Majesty to
maintain and establish the diplomatic relations with the
Court of Rome." It was clear, then, that the object of
the Bill was to effect a change in the law, and not merely
to explain doubts. The next point to consider, what
was meant by the " Court of Rome?" Now, there were
two Courts at Rome, the spiritual and the temporal. With
which of these was' the object of the Bill to enter into
. diplomatic relations? Doubts existed as to whether it
• was lawful to ;enter' into diplomatic relations with the
Sovereign Pontiff. That really was the matter in
question ; and yet there was no doubt that this could
not be maintained. He would reconcile this apparent
paradox. This Bill, for the purposes referred to by
the Noble Lord, was not necessary. They could
.do all that the Noble Lord contemplated to do under
the law as it stood at present. For political purposes
they could dispatch an agent, as they had recently done
in the case of Lord Minna, but if it was intended to place
the Government in a position to explain to the Court of
Rome the nature of its transactions within these realms,
that could not now be done by law, and: he hoped it
never would. That-was the real secret of the Bill. That
was the thing which could not be done. Upon an inter-
course upon political matters, neither the municipal law
nor the law of nations interposed any obstacle. The Bill
further provided that notwithstanding any laws now in
force, it should be lawful for her Majesty to enter into
diplomatic relations with " the Court of Rome." He
would ask, why in this case the ordinary courtesy should
be departed from, and that the title applied to the
Sovereign of that State by all civilised nations should be
omitted—a.title which, on the occasion of presenting a
degree to the Chevalier Bunsen, by the University of
Oxford, ho had himself applied to him by that illus-
trious University, when, in allusion to his mission to
Rome, it was described " ad Ponifice:n discordias corn.
ponere." This was not an unimpor tent objection, as it
was some value that in the course of all communications
that courtesy should be observed. The Bill referred
to Acts now in force, forbidding intercourse with Rome.
No Act of Parliamenwhich touches the prerogatives of the
Crown in matter of wars and peace would be affected. But
there were other Acts upon other matters which would
be repealed by this Bill. These communications with
the see of Rome had ceased since the year 1687, except
in the case of the mission of Lord Castlemain. Lord
Clarendon had openly stated the intercourse which had
taken place upon the subject of the Irish colleges. There
had been communications with Rome on the occasion of
the treaty of Vienna, also, between Lord Hood and the
Papal Government. In the reign of Queen Anne, they
also occurred, and further on the occasion of conferring a
pension on the Pretender, as he was termed, Cardinal
York. The breaking off relations with Rome was fol-
lowed by the enactment of the penal code. These were
- repealed, but they stopped short of repealing those laws,
which interdict( d communications with the see of Rome.
The lath of Elizabeth interdicted the reception of the
ordinances of the Pontiff within these realms. The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman cited several other Acts of Par-
liament, under which communication between the Court
of Rome and this country was unlawful, except in certain
cases,_ and it was those Acts which the Bill under consi-
deration sought to repeal. It was the intention of the
Ministers, if they could, to get into their hands the
Papal, as they have the monarchical power, and to use
either for the purpose of governing or niisgoverning
Ireland ; in other words, those remarkable words used
by Lord Lansdowne—" They wished to lay open to
themselves the peculiar influence possessed by the Court
of Rome." Now, see the effect of this arrangement.
The Sovereign Pontiff possessed unlimited power over all
the Catholic priests in England and Scotland. In Ire-
land be was without so much prerogative, and that
which was left was affected by common law. It was
thisaincontrolled power and prerogative that the British
Government now sought to obtain—to be exercised,
Perhaps, for their own purposes on the occasion of elec-
tions, or for the maintenance of political influence
in
Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) At the present moment the
Pope was a perfectly
free agent, but if this Bill
Passed, the Sovereign Pontiff would be bound to
accept any message or commission coming through
the British Ambassador, from the Court of Rome,
relative to the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland,
for the purpose, at least, of discussion and
consideration, if not of adhesion; another objec-
tion to the Bill consisted in the fact, that on the face
of the statute-book there were laws against some reli-
gious orders of the 'Church of Rome, which declared
them outlaws, and prohibited with them communication;
yet it was known that the Sovereign Pontiff would con-
tinue to communicate with and acknowledge them. This
▪ in itself was calculated to warrant the strongest opposi-
tmitieig,
nvteothe measure. The Hon. Member concluded by
as an amendment, that the Bill be read a second
time that day six months.
• Mr.. URQUHART, after commenting on the circum-
st,ance of the delay which had attended the introduction
Woihtteh h
this
the
easure into that House, and upon the haste with
Government were passing their measures
through Parliament, proceeded to observe that he
thought there must be some very extraordinary reason
for their determination of passing the present one. The
Hon. Member for Youghal had hinted at that reason,
and he thought that he had done so with considerable
• correctness. That reason- was, that by means of this
Bill the Government would avail themselves of
the Papal prerogative for purposes of their own in
the government of Ireland. If so, it was a matter
of vital importance to the country, as it affected
not, only the prerogative of the Crown, but the alle-
giance of the subject. Commercial and political pur-
• poses were undoubtedly involved in the present measure,
• . which at one time were intimately connected. It was
not the Spain of the Bourbons, but undiplomatic Spain,
that gained them that great ascendancy in the warfare of
Europe, and he was very sure that this Bill was not the
'means of establishing this influence abroad on the most
satisfactory basis. Its effect would be to connect the
Pope with the system of European diplomacy, which he
. thought ought to be carefully avoided. He gave his
cordial support to the amendment.
Sir R.. H. INGLIS, though he agreed to a very great
extent in the opinions expressed by the Hon. and Learned
Member for Youghal, said he could not give his support
in silence to the proposition which he bad brought for-
ward against this, measure. The case for the Bill had
been chiefly based on the convenience of commercial
- relations between this country and the States of the
Church. He should like to know what commercial re-
• istions of that kind, such as they were, which had not
been most efficiently discharged by their Consuls at
Rome, to whom, as he understood the office, those func-
tions were generally entrusted? He regarded this mea-
sure as. the commencement of a fundamental change,
-as the commencement, in fact, of a reconciliation
between England and Rome. In that light the objects of
the Bill were regarded by a large portion of this commu-
nity. There were bishops in the Church of Rome to
whom he would not object except in this, that they
claimed to be bishops in England against thel Queen's
wish and -permission. Dr. Wiseman said that Pope
Gregory XVI. observed on one occasion, " That it was
for England to begin. -England had a law disgraceful to
herself, and. insulting to the Church. Let England re-
,.
peal that law." It would seem that this very line of po-
hey had been closely followed; but the question was,
• whether this step was to be taken towards a reconcilia-
- lion between England' and the Pope, recognised in his
pontifical character. The fact appeared in the Tablet
• and in the Dublid Freeman's Journal,' that bulls were
••• now in this country from the Pope, constituting arch-
- bishoprics and bishoprics in this country. He did
.• • not . complain of Roman Catholics endeavouring to
advance their religion, but he did complain of Pro-
testants affording them every facility, although they
believed they were in error. Was the sovereign
'power of Rome represented at that moment by the
Pope and Cardinals? and was it not notorious that they
were bound by free agents :in their own city. He (Sir
•R. Inglis) contended that the Pope violated his treaty
with Austria, that he sent forward his troops to attack
Austria, and it was at such a moment they were going
to receive an Ambassador from him. Now, the House
should recollect that 3,500 of the clergymen of the
Church of England signed a protest against the present
Bill, and that whilst they displeased the Protestants they
did not by any means conciliate the undivided affgetions
of the Catholics by the measure. At an aggregate meet-
ing of the Catholics of London, held in Nrarch last, the
measure was condemned, and why, then, was it brought
• forward at such a late period of the session? It was in-
troduced into the House of Lords early in the session.
The standing orders in that House were suspended for
• the purpose of carrying it through with post haste; and
yet it was only on that night it was brought for-
word ill alo lionn of c9llll/30111.—(11ear, bear.)

There were three questions he wished to ask his Noble
Friend at the head of the Government.:—First, whether
any correspondence took place with the Pope with
regard to the establishment of Roman Catholic Arch-
bishoprics and Bishoprics in England? Secondly, if any
letter were written by Lord Clarendon to Earl Grey, in
consequence of which the Noble Earl wrote a circular,
giving titles to Roman Catholic Bishops which the law
never contemplated? And thirdly, Whether the letter
addressed to Archbishop Murray was an official docu-
ment, and intended, through him, to communicate di•
rectly with the Pope? He should not trouble the House
with any further observations, but, for different reasons
than those stated by the Hon. and Learned Member for
Youghal, he should oppose the Bill.
Mr. MOORE observed that, in his mind, the question
was a very simple one. The Hon. Baronet who last ad-
dressed the House had no objection whatever that rela-
tions should be had with Rome, as now—in an indirect
private manner, but the moment it was done openly and
avowedly, as became the English nation, then he came
forward with every opposition in his power. He thought
such a course unworthy of this country, and should,
therefore, support the Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL—The Hon. Gentleman who has
just sat down has in a few words completely answered
the speech of
my Hon. Friend.—(Hear, hear.) Accord.
ing to the law of this country, the Queen cannot enter
into communion with Rome. My lion. Friend says it
is quite clear from that that there can be no diplomatic
relations with Rome—such is the meaning of the law.
My Noble Friend stated, though with some hesitation,
that there is some doubt with respect to the meaning of
that statute, but that the more probable meaning of it is
that there cannot be a religious communion of the state
of England with the Church of Rome. But, however,
it is obvious that while that was the danger to be guarded
against, there is sufficient ambiguity in the wording of
our law to make it fitting that no diplomatic relations
should be formally established with Rome by any cre-
dentials authorised by the Queen unless with the con-
sent of Parliament. I did not think as long as any
doubt remained—and persons of the highest authority
whom we could consult did think there was doubt—
that it would be right for the Executive to take any
steps on this subject without the formal assent of Par-
liament. It is for that reason, therefore, that we pro-
posed a Bill on the subject. My Hon. Friend says this
is the first step towards a reconciliation with Rome.
Now those two words "communion" and " reconcilia-
tion" are liable to a like interpretation.—(Hear, hear.)
The word communion does, as I believe, mean that sort
of relation which was established by Queen Mary with
Rome after the reign of Edward VI.--(Hear, hear)—
that sort of relation which, I believe, James 11. intended
ultimately to establish with Rome, and the word recon-
ciliation is one of similar import, meaning likewise the
establishment of that religious relation with the Church
of Rome.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman who
has just spoken said, very truly, the Hon. Baronet the
Member for the University of Oxford has no objections
to these relations being established in fact. He has no
objection to an attaché being sent from Florence to con-
duct our political relations with Rome, but he cannot bear
it when established by Parliament and authorised by the
Queen's name at the head of the credentials. It is,
therefore, to the appearance and not to the fact that he
objects. But with respect to the policy of making this
alteration—l put it upon the ground, as my Noble
Friend said—that, as we have matters to transact with
the Court of Rome and the Sovereign of the Roman
States, it is far better that those relations should be put
upon an intelligible footing, and that a mission should
be sent to Rome as the avowed representative of the
Queen of England, than to maintain these underhand
and unavowed, though, at the same time, perfectly well-
known relations which have for many years existed.
Allusion has been made to the Chevalier Bunsen, and
some declaration of his with respect to the Court of
Rome. The Chevalier Bunsen was himself the repre-
sentative of a Protestant state at the Court of Rome—
(Hear, hear)—and is supposed to have drawn up, within
1831 or 1832, certain proposals with respect to the
government of the Roman States, and the reform of
certain temporal abuses which existed in those states.
He (a Protestant Minister) drew up those regulations,
and amongst the persons who were called on to assent
to them was the person who represented England, and
who was well known to have his authority from Eng-
land, whose support and assistance were required, but
who yet, in consequence of the existence of an ambi-
guous law, was unable to confess himself the repre-
sentative of England on that occasion. I ask which
was the better position? There was the Protestant
Minister of a Protestant country openly avowing his
character, and asking the assent of France and Austria
to his proposals, and the Minister of England asked to
give his opinion, but afraid and unable to avow himself.
I really cannot see what my Hon. Friend gains by this
hide-and-seek game of having a Minister who acts as a
Minister,' but cannot represent that character. My. Hon.
Friend has stated that be has no objection to any inter-
course with the Sovereign of Rome, whether he be dic-
tator or consul. I was rather alarmed to hear my Hon.
Friend make that declaration (Hear, hear, and
laughter)—because he cannot expect to see the ancient
dictators or consuls of Rome arise again; and if he
means a Government such as that of Rienzi, it rather
looks as though my Hon. Friend were engaged in some
Carbonaro conspiracy, hoping to overturn the authority
of the Pope, and set up some tribune of the people in his
place.—(Great laughter.) But my Hon. Friend thinks
this Bill will give some advantage to the Roman Catholic
Church, and that it appears us if we were altering the
Protestant character of the constitution, and that it is,
therefore, not advisable to enter into these relations. I
own I think it far better with respect to all these mattersth t
we should not stand on the adventitious and artificial aid
which we derive from saying, "We will have no inter-
course with Rome." I think that, if the matter be in it-
self right, it is far better that we should do away with
the sort of fiction that we cannot hold any diplomatic
relations with Rome, and let the Roman Catholics derive
any benefit they can from the change. Ido not think
that Protestanism rests on so frail a foundation, and I
should be much more afraid of the Roman Catholic reli-
gion if I thought that those foolish and obsolete restric-
tions were really the securities upon which Protestant-
ism relies.—(Cheers.) For my own part I am not dis-
posed to think that it would be for the advantage of this
country, or that it would be satisfactory to the Roman
Catholics themselves, that we should have any agree-
ment by which their religious arrangements should be
regulated. It is quite obvious that you cannot by any
means or authority whatever prevent the Pope from
communicating with this country, by some means or
other. You may try to prevent that communication
being open, though it would be very foolish and absurd
if you were to adopt means with vigour and energy for
that purpose. If it were not open it would be secret—
(Hear, hear)—and so long as there are Roman
Catholics—and so long as they acknowledge the
Pope as the head of their Church—you cannot
prevent his having spiritual influence with
those who belong to that communion.—(Hear, hear.)
Uon the whole, I think the House will see in this Bill
the only mode of making the law agree with the fact—
(Hear)—and having been long aware of the fact that we
have had relations with the Court of Rome, and that
there may be questions, whether in reference to politics
or to commerce, or any more general question, which
may make it advisable to have diplomatic intercourse
with Rome, I trust the House will see no objections to a
Bill of this kind, which unites the law with the fact, and
that they will give it the sanction of their approval. It
has been already, under other circumstances, agreed to
by the House of Lords. It was agreed to some months
ago; and since that time certain events have occurred.
—(Hear, hear.) Undoubtedly these events have con-
tributed in a certain degree to shake the temporal au-
thority of the Pope; but I do trust that this House will
not consider, because that temporal authority has been
weakened, that now is the opportunity of saying to the
Pope, " We should have been glad to have diplomatic
relations with you when you were strong, but now, when
you are weak,
we are ready to throw off such relations,
and we decline to have any intercourse with you." For
these reasons I hope the House will agree to the second
reading of the Bill.—(Cheers.)
Mr. LAW opposed the Bill. He objected to the
wording of the preamble of the Bill, and contended that
there was no doubt in respect to the nature of the sove-
reignty: of Rome. It was a mere quibble to make the
Bill palatable to the people of this country.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND would support the Bill, and
any measure which went the length of producing a good
understanding between Christian sects all over the
world. Some Gentlemen seemed to be frightened out
of their wits that a bull should be sent from Rome to
Ireland.—(Hear.) Now, what was the history of the
whole affair ? Why, that one old gentleman in Ronie
wrote a letter to another old gentleman in Ireland—(A
laugh)—which he put into the post-office, and which
came in proper time to hand. The Hon. Gentleman
then said that it was most absurd to object to an ecclesi-
astic being made an ambassador from Rome to this
country. Then, again, why should they object to the
Roman Catholics having bishops and archbishops ?
This was a matter of arrangement on the part of the
Roman Catholics with which they had nothing to do.
What would they have to do with the Church of Scot-
land if it established another presbytery in London ?
He supported this Bill because it enabled the Govern-
ment to do that openly which for years they had done
secretly.—(Hear.)
Mr. NAPIER said his objection to this Bill was, that
it was intended to be used as a means of operating—
through the Pope of Rome—on the Catholic clergy in
these countries. If they could not govern Ireland through
the medium of the English constitution, they ought not
to hold Ireland one moment longer. In sending a per-
son to Rome as an Ambassador, they would be recog-
nizing the supremacy of the Pope, and that would be
directly against the Act of Settlement; but the laws of
this country gave the Roman Catholics the same privi-
leges as Protestants; they were eligible for all situations
except the monarchy; and what reason, then, had the
to complain? The supremacy of the Pope being thus
repudiated by the Act of Settlement, England was bound
to preserve that denunciation, for while the Protes-
tantism of England remained the constitution guaranteed
by that Act of Settlement would exist, giving equal
laws and equal rights, and liberty to, all.—(Hear.)
What was the object of the present measure? He found
from the instructions given to Lord Minto, that he was,
when at Rome, to endeavovr to get the Pope to consent
to the expulsion of the Jesuits from Switzerland. Now,
that was one of the evils to which diplomatic relations
with Rome would give rise, for it would cause a con-
tinual interference with the internal affairs of other Ca-
tholic countries through the Pope on the intercession of
this country. That, therefore, would give rise to much
inconvenience, but the fact was, the real object of the
measure was to govern Ireland through the Court of
home, and that was as much as an admission on the
accordinga
nt ot thehen ceonntsetri
et udt iontooaf t
ch
oi sm cp oa ur s t
or
ny .
part of Government that they could not govern Ireland
in
b e
tTwheee
tohn
e.
loyalty and order which characterised the Protestant
apnodrooditsiorodfetrhowhinhabitants
t the of
characteristicslreland,
the
Ca-
tholic portion of it, and argued from that that it would

be derogatory to the principles of justice to sacrifice
the Protestantism of the country at the shrine of Ca-
tholicism.
Mr. ROUNDELL PALMER said they would be de-
ceiving themselves and the country if they were to deal
with this question other than as one of' great import-
ance, and deserving more consideration than was likely
to be given it. He conceived the measure was not of
that pressing importance that it should be pressed
through at this period of the session, and in so thin a
House. The Noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) had said
that they had already had relations with the Roman
States, and no doubt such was the case. Their having
them still was perhaps most necessary, and at a proper
time he would be ready to consider any measure which
would place those relations on a proper footing. But
when for that purpose such a Bill as the present,
which would place this country in a relation to
Rome which it was not with any other country in
the worl 1, was a course he must object to, as he
considered the most ruinous consequences would re
suit from it. No doubt it was said the measure
only had reference to temporal diplomatic purposes,
that in a religious point it would not operate, and
were that the case he would not oppose it ; but he be.
lieved the whole importance of the measure lay in the
fact that it could be made applicable to relations of a
different kind, and on that account he opposed it. The
House, according to all appearances, would soon have
to deal with the establishment of the Roman Catholic
Church in Ireland, and he could not but connect the
present measure with that question, as he had no doubt
the one was intended as an auxiliary to the other.
Mr. FAGAN, as a Roman Catholic, was indifferent
whether diplomatic relations were established with the
Court of Rome or not, but he could not vote for the
present measure, in consequence of the insult cast upon
the Pope in the second clause of it.—(Cries of " Divide,
divide").
Mr. M. J'. O'CONNELL would vote for the measure,
as in Committee it was intended to strike out that clause.
It was of importance that such relations as contem-
plated by the measure should be established with the
Court of Rome, as whatever was done with that Court
ought to be done speedily. There was much more room
for intrigue now than there would be were regular rela-
tions established, for then all transactions between the
two Courts must be made known to the country.
Mr. GLADSTONE could not give a silent vote on the
subject, but would make his remarks briefly. He felt
compelled to give a sort of assent to the principle of the
Bill, but it was unfortunate that they were called on to
debate the question at so late a period of the session. It
was also unfortunate that they should be called on to de-
bate the question when matters were in such a state in
Italy. Yet he must say that he could not do any act
which would blink the principle of the Bill. For more
than a hundred years after the Reformation the Pope was
either in arms against this country, or was occupied in
endeavouring to regain possession of it, and although, as
a matter of course, there could be no diplomatic relations
then with his Court, that was no reason why there should
not be so now. He thought the manner in which com-
munications were made with the Court of Rome at pre-
sent was unworthy of the ingenuousness of the English
character. The fact that these communications were
held with the Court of Rome suggested the absolute
necessity that these communications should be put upon
a different basis. Was it not necessary when they con-
sidered that the Bishops of the Church of Rome were
subordinate to the Pope, and therefore they would
not bind themselves to conditions which might be
overruled by the Pope ; so that if they were to have any
communication, with the Roman Catholic ecclesiastics,
they could only do so effectually through the head of
their Church ; and that consideration prompted the
absolute necessity for this Bill, and he should not be de-
barred by any misapprehension of his views to vote in
favour of it
Mr. NEWDEGATE said he had a great objection to
the Bill. He regretted that Lord Clarendon had taken
the course he had, and having done so, he wished he had
hid his shame ; it had one effect, it opened their eyes.
He should vote against the Bill.
Lord ARUNDEL and SURREY said he should vote
for the second reading of the Bill, with the view of omit-
ting the second clause in Committee, and that his course
after that would be influenced by the decision come to
upon that amendment.
Mr. GOULBURN said, considering the lateness of
the session, and the contradictory arguments by which
the Bill was supported, he should vote against the second
reading.
Sir H. VERNER said his Hon. Friend had a right
to take credit for the loyalty of the Protestants of
Ireland. He referred to the province with which he was
connected, and there were but two regiments, which was
a proof of their loyalty; and the Member for Kerry was
wrong in taunting him for the praise he had bestowed
upon them.
Mr. M. O'CONNELL explained, that ho only com-
plained that the Learned Gentleman appeared to give
them credit for exclusive loyalty.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion 125
Against it
Majority for the second reading —79
In reply to a question from Mr. LAW,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated that the Bill would be
committed on Wednesday next.
The Bill was then read a second time.
The Parochial Debts and Audit Bill was road a third
time, the report brought up, and clauses added to the

Fox, S. L.

Bill.
The Committee on the Fees (Court of Chancery) Bill
was postponed to Monday next.
On the older of the day for the committal of the Nui-
sances and Contagious Diseases Bill being read,
Lord MORPETH proposed that the Bill be committed
pro forma, for the purpose of adding certain amendments.
After a short discussion, the motion was agreed to,
and the amendments were ordered to bo added to the
Bill.
The House then went into Committee on the Slave
Trade Bill.

The clauses were agreed to.
The Ecclesiastical Suits Commissioners (Ireland) Bill
also:went through Committee.
The Poor Removal Bill (No. 2) was read a third time
and passed, alter some discussion.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of
and the House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock.

THEAPPREHENDED CHARTISTS.
A number of the Chartists, arrested on Wednesday
night, were in custody at the Bow-street police-station
all yesterday, and during the afternoon several more
were brought from different places to the same station.
At about half-past three o'clock a gentleman, from the
office of the Treasury Solicitor, made an application to
Mr. Hall, the Chief Magistrate, stating, that as the
cases were of an important kind, and as there was a
good deal of evidence to be given, it would be convenient
if the magistrate would allow the examinations to be
postponed until to-morrow (this day).
Mr. HALL granted the application.
the
From the information received by the Government
yesterday, not the least doubt is now entertained thut
contemplated
merely
they i n
determinedproc es i procession
n to
mhiednight t Chartistsand
not
assassinate the police who were on duty, in the event of
it not and to to commitforthe the
timely most
informationtheir interference, but also to fire many of the public
buildings,
osawful
forwarded
Had
to head-quarters, there seems every probability
that the fellows would have carried their intentions
into effect. It appears that when a room was hired
at the Peacock, Francis-street, Westminster-road, the
parties told the landlady that they wanted the room
merely to hold a trades meeting. By some means which
at present has not been ascertained, the owner of the
house ascertained that the parties who had hired the
place were Chartists, and that they intended to come
armed. The moment they came she told them that she
could not allow the meeting to take place in her house.
Some of the parties who bad then assembled cried out to
their companions, " Oh, we are piped, we had better go
home." Others, more daring than the rest, said, " Well,
if we have failed here, come along with us; we will take
you to a place with a long passage, where we can pounce
out upon the police, should they attempt to attack us."
con veyed t he intelligence to
Some parties immediate y
.t
ho without a moml ent'ns loss
Mr. Superintendent Rutt, w
of time, proceeded with a strong muster of men, and suc-
ceeded in apprehending the whole of the prisoners at the
present time in custody.
found by the po-
All sorts of ammunition have been
apprehended, and
lice at the residences of the parties
gunpowder found secreted in the
has actually been
churchyards of the metropolis, evidently showing what
were the fiendish objects of the villains had they not been
frustrated.
When Mr. Rutt went to apprehend a man in Blue
Anchor-yard, the moment he and Mr. Russell entered
the place a dog was get at them, which made an attack
upon Mr. Superintendent Rutt; that officer, not to be
daunted, rushed up the stairs, and, in spite of all resist-
ance, he succeeded in apprehending his man.
Mr. Superintendent Grimwood (E), Pearce (1),
Beresford (C), Rutt (L), and Evans (M division), were
in reserve until a late hour last night ready to start off
to any part of the metropolis, in the event of their ser-
vices being required. The military were also ready to
act, in fact every precaution had been taken by the
authorities, quite sufficient to prevent any riot had such
been attempted.
With respect to Mr. Smith, the landlord of the Angel,
in. Webber-street, where the parties were apprehended
on Wednesday night, the Commissioners of Police are
perfectly satisfied that he had no knowledge of the fel-
lows being present. They went in without saying a
word to any person connected with the establishment,
and it was not until the police entered the building
that Mr. Smith knew anything of the parties being
I present.
),

THE LoNnori Siasoic—Town is thinning fast,
and the season at the west may be said to have com-
menced its termination. It has proved an average one
for the west-end shopkeepers; nearly all of whom have
catered with success for the public, by the production of
novelties. The Act for the Security of Designs must re-
ceive the credit of this, without which the ingenious
would have been left at the mercy of the unprincipled.
Perhaps, few of such inventions have obtained more no-
toriety than the Syrian Paletot of Swain and Co., of
379, Oxford-street ; price 405.; which after being sought
by the aristocratic for town wear, is now as readily
made purchase of for the sea-side promenade or country
lounge.—Morning Post, July 25,1848.
[-ADVERTISE:VS:XT.:I—DM EAILL OF ALAS.:MOB
ASP ROLLO/PI:I'S PILLS.—An artounding cur* by this miraculous
medicine, arter eery other means had failed. see, extract trout bls
Lordship's, letter, dated " Villa Me•Maa, Leghorn, Feb. 21, 1543.
Professor Holloway—Sir : I beg to acquaint yen that your pills have
effected a cure of a disorder is my liver and atoraach all the raost
eminent of the facility, at hems and all over the centriont, had not
These wendorftil pills will
been able t• effect; nay, not ever the waters of Carlsbad or Ma.
)of"thAeLl'allve.rzeorsatelach.—Sahl (also liellewars
rioe
iieinrnetblialaoridn.yo
disease(
AS
rOfeSSOr llolloway's Establlshmat, 244, Strand, Ind
by all medicine Tenders throughout the ciTilbed world,

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.)
THURSDAY, AUG. 17.
DERBY WRIT.

Motion made, and Qaestion put, " That Mr. Speaker do
issue his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to make out a
New Writ for electing of two Burgesses to serve in this pre-
sent Parliament for the Borough of Derby, in the room of
the Right Honourable Edward• Strutt and the Honourable
Edward Frederick Leveson (lower, whose Election has been
determined to be void.' Debate arising; Motion made, and
Question put, " That the Debate be now adjourned." The
House divided :

Abdy, T. N.
Armstrong, Sir A.
Arundel, Earl of
Barnard, E. G.
Bellew, K. M.

itTriely,, Captain
Berkeley, Craven
Bernal, Ralph
_

Birch, sir fhomas
Bowring, Pr.

Boyle, Colonel
Bright, John
Brown, W.

Campbell, W. F.
Cliolmeley, Sir M.
Cobden, Richard
Duncan, George
Dundas, Admiral
Ebrington, Lord
Elliot, John E.
Ferguson, Sir R.
Forster, ➢lathew
Fortescue, J. W.
Fox, W. J.

Gladstone, W. E.

MAJORITY-AYES, 85.
Hay, Lord J. Russell, Lord John
Hayter, W. G. Rutherford, A.
Headlam,:T. E. Balwey, Colonel
Hill, Lord Marcus Seholetleld, William
Howard, P. H. Scrape, G. P.
Jervis, Sir John Shell, R. L.
Kershaw, James Smith, John A.
Lewis, George C. Somerville. Sir W.
Lushington, C. Stuart, Lord D.
Maher, N. Talfourd, Sergeant
Mangles, R. D. Tenison, E. K.
Martin, J. Thteknesse, Ralph
Martin,,C..W. Thompson, Colonel
Matheson, Colonel Thornely, T.
Maule, Fox Townahend. Captain
Milner, W. M. Tufnell, Henry
Moffatt, George Turner, Edmund
Moore, George H. Villiers, Charles
Morris, David Wall, C. B.
Norreys, Lord Ward, H. G.
O'Brien, T. Watkins, Colonel
Osborne, Ralph Willcox, Brodie
Paget, Lord A. Wilson, James
Paget, Lord Clarence Wilson, Matthew
Parker, John Wrightson, W. R.
Pearson, Charles
Power, Dr. TLLLLIM•
Raphael, Alexander Hume,.Joseph
Rich, Henry Wood, W. P.
Homily, Sir John

Greene, Joh'
Grey, Ralph W.
Grosvenor, Lord R.
Grosvenor, Earl
Hawes, Benj.

Anstey, Thomas C.

Bankes, G.
Bentinck, Lord G.
Blackstone, W. S.
Brisco, M.

Burrell, Sir C.
Cabin'', B. B.

Christy, Samuel
Cocks, Thomas S.
Coles, Henry B.
back. Quintin
Dodd, George

Goring, Charles
Goulburn, Henry
Grogan, Edward

MINORITY—NOES, 43.
Halford, Sir H. Napier, Joseph
Hamilton, G. A. O'Connor, Feargus
Harris, Hon. Capt. Palmer, Roundell
Ileneage, G. H. Finney, W.
Henley, J. W. Plowden, W. H.
Hildyard, T. B. Sibthorp, Colonel
Hindley Charles Tollemache, F. J.
Hobhouse, T. B. Urquhart, David
Hotham, Lord . Verner, Sir W.
Inglis, Sir R. Vivian, J. E.
Jolliffe, Sir W. it Vy-vyan, Sir R.
Jones, Captain Vyse, 11-
Law, C. E.
Lygon, General Mum.
Mandeville, Viscount Newdegate, N.
Mullings, J. R. Spooner, R.

DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE COURT OF
ROME BILL.

Order for Second Reading read; Motion made, and Ques-
tion proposed, "That the bill be now read a second time:"—
Amendment proposed, to leave out the word " now," and at
the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day three
months :"—Question put, " That the word ' now' stand part
of the Question." The House divided:—
MAJORITY—AYES, 125.
Abdy, Thomas N. Gladstone,' W. E. Parker, John
Acland, Sir T. Greene. John Pechell, Captain
Adair, Hugh E. Grenfell, Charles W. Perfect, Robert
Adair, R. Shafto Grey, Sir G. , Pinney, William
Anson, Colonel Grey, R. W. Power, Dr.
Armstrang, Sir A. Grosvenor, Lord R. Posey, P.
Arundel, Earl of Grosvenor, Earl • Raphael, Alexander
Bagshaw, John Harcourt, G. Reynolds, John
Barnard, E. G. Hawes, B. Rich, Henry
Bellew, R. M. Hayter, W. G.' Romilly, Sir John
Berkeley, Captain Headlam, Thomas . Russell, Lord J.
Berkeley, Craven Hobhouse, Sir John Rutherfurd, A.
Bernal, Ralph Ilobhotise, T. B. Salwey, Colonel
Birch, Sir Thomas Howard, P. H. Schelefleld, W.
Blacken, S. W. Howard, Sir R. Seymour, Lord
13°Irriad. Dr. Jervis, Sir John Shell, R. L.
Boyle, Colonel Keogh, William Shelburne, Earl of
Bright, John Lascelles, W• S• Sheridan, R. B.
Brotherton, J. Leonard, T. B. Simeon, John
Brown, W. Lewis, G. C. Smith, J. A.
Buller, Charles Locke, Joseph Somerville, Sir W.
Bunbury, E. 11. Lushington, Charles Stuart, Lord D.
Carew, W. P. M'Gregor, John Talroard, Sergeant
Childers, J. W. Maher, N. Tenison, E. K.
Clay, James Martin, John Ihicknesse, R. A.
Clements, Charles Marthr,-C..W. Thompson, Coionel
Colobrooke, Sir T. Matheson, Colonel Thornely, Thomas
Courtenay, Lord Maule, Fox Tollemache, F. 1.
Cowper, W. F. Melgund, Viscount Townshend, Captain
Craig, W. G. Milner, W. M. Tamer, E.
Denison, W. J. Monsen, William Villiers, Charles
Divett, Edward Moore, G. Watkins, Colonel
Dodd, George! Morpeth, Viscount Willcox, Brodie
Douro, Marquis of Norreys, Lord Williams, Johu
Drummond, Henry Norreys, Sir D. Wilson, James
Dundas, Admiral O'Brien, Timothy Wilson, Matthew
Dunne, F. P. O'Connell, M. J. Wodehouse, Edmund
Ebrington, Viscount Ogle, S. C. Wood, Sir Charles
Elliot, J. E. Osborne, Ralph Wood, W. P.
Ferguson, Sir R. Owen, Sir J.
Foley, John H. PagekLord A. , TELLXIII.
Forster, Matthew - Paget, Lord C. ' Hill, Lord M.
Fox, W. J. . Palmerston, Viscount Tuftiell, Henry

Archdall, Captain
Banker, George
Blackstone, W.
Blandford, Marquis
Broadley, Henry
Ilruen, Colonel
Burrell, Sir C.

Cabbell, B. B.
Chaplin, W. J.
Chichester, Lord J.
Christy, Samuel
Coles, H. B.
Devereux, J. T.
Dick, Quint!"
Duncan, George
l're, C ti

MINORITY-NOES, 46.
Fox, S. L.
Frewen, C. H.
Gooch, E. S.
Goring, C.
Goniburn, Henry
Grogan, E.
Gwyn, Bowel
Hamilton, G. A.
Henley, J. W.
Hildyard, T.,,13. T.
Hood, Sir A.
Hotham, Lord
Hudson, G.
Inglis, Sinn.
Jolliffe, Sir VI G.
Law, C. E.
Mullings, J. R.

Napier, J-osePh
Newdegate, C. r .
Fs.hner, Roundel'
Pearson, Charles
Plowden, W. H.
Robinson, G. R.
Spooner, Richard
Tollcmache, J•hn
Turner, G. J.
Verner, Sir W.
Vyse, K. R. K. H.
Wyld, James

Fagan, William

TELLERS.
Urquhart, David

Anitcy, T. C.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Aug. 17.
(Before Mr. Commissioner FANS.)

IN THE BANKRUPTCY OF LOUIS GEORGE JULLIEN.

The bankrupt, the well-known conductor of concerts,
and late lessee of Drury-lane Theatre, applied for his
certificate.

Mr. Cooke opposed on behalf of three creditors,
namely, Mr. Benham, of Wigmore-street; Mr. Way
\Vytcherley, of Wigmore-street; and Mr. Folkes, of
Little Russell-street. The object of the opposition, it
may be premised, was not directed so much against the
bankrupt obtaining his certificate, as to elicit the manner
in which Mr. Lewis, a solicitor, of No. 9, Lower Gros-
venor-street, and Mr. Levi, a sheriff's officer, and
brother-in-law of Mr. Lewis, had obtained possession of
nearly the whole of the bankrupt's property, and at the
same time to obtain an order from the Commissioner for
the setting apart, by the bankrupt, of a portion of his
future earnings, in part liquidation of his present debts.
Mr. CooKE said, the general grounds of opposition
were the following:—The large amount of the bankrupt's
debts (12,0000, and the smallness of the assets, being
only about 150/. The next question was, whether
a man, who. had. everything to gain and nothing to lose,
was justified in entering upon a speculation in the
manner the bankrupt had done. It appeared from the
balance-sheet that, in 1846, the bankrupt had a defi-
ciency of upwards of 1001. In April, 1848, he stopped
payment with a deficiency of 12,0001. The bankrupt
had resided in a large house in Harley-street, and his
expenses were excessive, namely, about 1,800/. in little
more than a year and a half. There was also the objec-
tion, that the bankrupt had paid a most usurious rate of
interest to his own attorney, a Mr. Lewis, and that
that attorney had at length been permitted by him to
obtain almost the entire of his property. It would
be for the Court to decide whether, when the case had
been fully heard, the certificate could be granted, with-
out attaching thereto certain conditions as might be the
means of obtaining a partial liquidation of his debts.
M. Jullien was then examined—ln December, 1846,
he was 1251. deficient. In 1847 he realized a net profit
of 3,1831. by a tour in the provinces. In August, 1847,
he became lessee of Drury-lane Theatre, undertaking to
pay a rental of 3,500/. per year by instalments of 201.
per night, until that amount should be paid. The Grand
Opera commenced in the November following, the
expenses were 4501. per night, and the performances
lasted fifty-two nights. His losses durhig. that time were
15,080/. Had never undertaken a similar speculation
before. Ho left London on a provincial tour on the 3d
of January, 1848. Mr. Lewis was his attorney, and
had from a period dating nine years back
Lewis
in the
practice of discounting his bills. Mr. Lewis had never
given him a statement of accounts, although he had fre-
quently applied to him for one. Did not know what
rate of interest he paid. Was quite certain Mr. Lewis
had never given him a statement of the accounts between
them.
Mr. COLE (on behalf of the assignees) bore stated that
the creditors could get no statement from Mr. Lewis of
his transactions with the bankrupt, beyond his showing
a diary containing entrances of half-a-dozen items.
Mr. Commissioner FANE—I have ample powers to
compel Mr. Lewis to produce a cash account.
Mr. COLE—Mr. Lewis has stated that he kept no book
of account respecting his transactions.
Examination continued—He (the bankrupt) thought
that when! Mr. Lewis began to discount his bills he
charged five per cent. per annual for the discounts.
Something occurred which led him to imagine that it.
might be fire per cent. per month. This was six years
ago. Mr. Lewis explained by saying that the charge
was for other things. lie (the bankrupt) did not feel
satisfied, and endeavoured to get out of his hands. In
twelve months after th.at time ho had paid off every-
thing, except Mr. Lewis's law charges, , for which be
could not get his bill. Two or three years afterwards,
being greatly pressed for money, he again borrowed of
Mr. Lewis 200/., mace which time he might have had
eight or ten other transactions with him. It
appeared by his balance-sheet. that Lewis now
holds his bills for upwards of 3. ,000/. Did not keep an
account of his money transactions with Mr. Lewis. On
the Ist of January, 1848, he and his partner in Regent-
street sold that business to Messrs. Chappell and Beale
for 4,000/. He had four-fifths. of that business, so that
his share was 3,200/. Deducting a sum of 6001. that he
at that time owed to It fessss. ,Uhappell and Beale, he
received the difference in cash. Ile then paid 6001. to
the London and Westminster Bank, 2501. for a bill due
to Mr. Bielefield, 300/. to Mr. Benham, and 260/. to Mrs.
Levi. He also paid Lewis 6001. 110 then paid various
monthly and weekly salaries that were due to performers;
and finding that he had not sufficient money left
for this purpose by 3001., ho applied to Mr. Lewis, who
gave him back 300/. He then paid the remainder of the
salaries. Lewis then drew a bill upon him for 3001., as
he believed, but could not say the exact amount, nor
whether it was payable in two or three months. Ile
(the bankrupt) had further made an agreement with
Chappell and Beale, by which they undertook to pay
him 3001. per year, for six years, for certain musical
services. The undertaking. was secured by bond. He
never authorised Mr.
.Lewis to obtain from Chappell
and Beale eighteen bills of exchange, of 100/. each,
in exchange for this bond. If it was done, it was with-
out his authority. Had since beard that such en ex-
' change had taken place, sad that Lewis has got the
bills.. He had never seen Lewis privately since the t ex-
change took piece. He (the bankrupt) was also to have
from Chappell and Beale an annuity of 700/. per year
for six years for other services. That was also secured
assignment of the latter
by bond. He had executed an
bond, procured by Lewis,. on the evening of Sunday the
2d of January,
having first consulted hi 6 wife, Madame
Jullien, whether be should do so. Lewis dined with him