The Sun.
London, England, 1834-05-03 00:00:00

ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION.

The Bishop of LONDON would take that opportunity
of stating that the returns of the ecclesiastical commission
had been completed, and.would be shortly laid before their
lordships. They had met with every assistance from
the clergymen of every parish, and were prepared to make
a report of the aggregate income of the clergy.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA said that, with all respect
to the noble earl at the head of the Government, and he
begged to say that though he very materially differed with
him, there was no man for whose political conduct he
had more respect ; still he thought he would not be
doing his duty to the country if he did not ask some
questions respecting a statement which had been made in
the other House of Parliament, with respect to a letter
said to have been written by a noble marquis, late at'the
head of the Government in Ireland. That reference was
made during the discussion on the question of the
repeal of the union, and it was stated that it re-
commended the means for the repeal of the union,
and for the destruction of the established church
in that country. Ile rose for the purpose of ask-
ing whether there was any foundation for such a report ?
His opinion was that it was altogether a gross fabri-
cation on the part of those agitators who were
the curse of Ireland, whose great object was destruction of
the government and the church. No man could doubt of
the sincerity of the noble earl (Grey) in his regard to the
established church, and if he wanted proof, it was to be
found in the answer of that noble earl to a deputation
of dissenters that had waited upon him within these few
days. For that answer he (Earl Winchilsea) returned
him his most sincere thanks, and for his most candidavowal
of the difficulties in which he was placed by the demands
of the dissenters, he deserved the thanks of the country.
If those statements went ußanswered they would give
great pain to the friends of the church.
Earl GREY, after thanking the noble earl for his
courtesy in giving notice of his intention to ask the
question, and thanking him for the encomiums which
he had passed upon his conduct, said he must, notwith-

standing, express his infinite surprise that the question
was put, after what had transpired in the other house only
two evenings ago with regard to that letter which it was
stated recommended thedestruction of the established church.
The noble earl had given him credit for his professions in
favour of the connection between church and state, and
for his determination to uphold the church as at present
established. He must then have concluded that, had such
propositions been made to him from one in a high situation,
an unmediate separation between him and that noble per-
son must have taken place. (Cheers.) He had no hesita-
tion in saying that such a proposition had never been
made to him, or to any other person in the Govern-
ment. (Loud cheers.) He, at the same time, must
admit that a letter was written to him by the noble mar-
quis of the date specified, a letter which was perfectly con-
sistent with the duty of that noble marquis, as it stated his
views with respect to the situation of that unhappy country
( Ireland), and pointing out what he considered the best means
of abating the evils which were its ruin. That letter was
certainly of a most confidential nature, and when it was
first alluded to in the other house, no intimation of the
date was given (Hear, hear), and when his noble
friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, questioned him
( Earl Grey) upon the subject he had given the same an-
swer that that noble lord had done in the first in-
stance, viz., that he had no recollection of such aletter.
However, when the date was given, among a great
mass of correspondence the letter was found, but how
the confidence of the government had been so foully be-
trayed (Cheers) he could not possibly tell. The letter was
one most certainly within the duty of the noble marquis in
the situation which he filled, it was his duty to statehis views
upon the best measures then under discussion by the Go-
vernment for the pacification of unhappy Ireland. At the
same time he must again say, that the letter was
most strictly confidential,—to be communicated only
to the members of the Government who were deliberating
upon the momentous question then under consideration.
(Cheers.) Having stated so much, he trusted he hadstated
enough to show that the letter was one to which no
public reference ought to have been made by any one
(Cheers), far less should it have been communicated
to any one without the Cabinet. (Hear, hear.)
Having said thus much, the noble earl added that he
thought he had said quite enough to show that •the letter
was one to which no public reference should or ought to
have been made. (Hear, hear.) It was not for him to say
how far any person who had got possession of such a letter
the character of which was confidential, had made use of it,
but speaking for himself, he must confess, that, with his
nations of honour, if such a letter had come into his
possession, lie should certainly have thought himself
precluded, without the permission of the writer, and of the
person to whom it was addressed, from making any use of it.
He hoped their lordships would, however, not be lcdaway
into a belief that there was anything in thatletter w hich tended
in the slightest degree to throw any discredit on the noble
marquis ; it was a letter which could not be produced, and
it contained sentiments which partly led to the adoption of
some great measures which were then under consideration.
Whether the suggestions went farther or shorter than
the measures which were actually adopted, could not be a
matter of interest to the public. They were, however,
the foundation of measures that were afterwards sanc-
tioned by the legislature, although the noble mar-
quis had subsequently changed his opinion respecting
them. All he (Lord Grey) could say was that the letter
was written in the greatest sincerity, and their lordships,
he was sure, would not establish such an inconvenient, not
to say mischievous doctrine, as to require to make public
those discussions which had been made in private.
(Hear, hear.) Their lordships would judge of ministers
by their acts, and by their acts alone. (Hear.) He re-
peated, he could only regret that the necessity had arisen for
the noble earl (Winchilsea) to ask the question which he
had done, which would not have been necessary had there
not been conduct of the most dishonourable kind practised.
No one could believe that the noble marquis was the party
who would sanction such conduct, and it could only have
been done by the most treacherous malice. He hoped now
that his explanation would be satisfactory to their lordships,
and he could not but express how utterly at variance with
that was becoming in any person, was the conduct to which
he had alluded.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA assured the noble earl
that his explanation was not only satisfactory to him but to
every man of honourable feelings. (Hear, hear.) He
agreed with the noble earl that there had been a
gross and base piece of treachery practised in the pub-
lication of that letter by those into whose possession
it had passed, and he felt gratified that he had been the
means of giving the noble earl the opportunity of making
such a statement. He now hoped and trusted that that
high minded nation, the people of Ireland, would see and
treat as it deserved, the base character of those who could
be guilty of such treachery. (Hear. )
MUSICAL FESTIVALS.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE then rose, in pursuance
of a notice which he had given, to bring forward the subject
of the musical festival, which it was in contemplation
to hold in Westminster Abbey. ( Hear, hear, hear. )
He considered that any music in a church, unaccom-
panied with prayer, was highly indecorous. It had been
stated that George the Third was favourable to the prac-
tice, but he (the noble duke) was quite certain, that if
George 111. had lived to the present time, he would not have
sanctioned it. It had been objected to by the dean and
chapter of Westminster, and they had requested that West-
minster Hall might be appropriated to that purpose. He
should not have had so much objection to it if the money
that was 'collected was to be appropriated towards the
building of churches and chapels, but, instead of that, it
was to go' towards the maintenance of decayed musi-
cians ; and he considered, that the cathedral having
been consecrated to the service of Almighty God, it was
profane and wicked to make use of it for any other
purpose.
The Earl of MALMESBURY thought the holding of
the musical festival inWestminster Abbey, could not be con-
sidered as a desecration of that holy place. The churches
in the metropolis were often desecrated, and grossly dese-
crated when any parish broils arose, but with respect to
this subject, in no point of view could he take it :n the
light in which the noble duke had. In the first place, the
music was all sacred ; and, in the next place, if he was
not misinformed, the object of it was a charitable object.
Sacred music was performed in the cathedrals of Glouces-
ter, York, and several other cities, all under the authority
of the prelates of the dioceses, and no objection had been
offered to it because it was for a charitable purpose. If he
thought that public worship was in any way impeded by
the performances, he would at once hold with his noble
friend ; but it did not interfere, at all events, with the
public worship on Sundays. The objection to which
the noble duke had alluded, from the dean and chapter, he
believed arose from their apprehensions that the statues
would be injured by the erection of the scaffolding ; and,
under these circumstances, he hoped the noble duke
would content himself' with what he had raised, and not
press the subject any further.
The Bishop of LONDON said he should be compromis-
ing his sincerity if he could conscientiously approve of
the practice of holding a festival like the present in West-
minster Abbey. Upon this subject he had been grossly
misrepresented, as if he had entertained a disrespect for
the highest personage in the realm. His opinions on this
subject were well known. He had always acted upon
them, and he had objected to similar festivals,
because he
did not think it right that places dedicated to the worship
of God should be turned to any other purpose.
The Duke of CUMBERLAND said that he would be
the last person to sanction anything which could in any
shape prove injurious to the established church ; he did
not, however, concur with his right rev. friend the Bishop
of London, in thinking that such a festival as the present
could in any way be injurious to the church, as its cele-
bration could not in any way interfere with the service of
the church. (Hear, hear. )
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that he regretted
this conversation had taken place. (Hear, hear.) He
was one of those who was appointed to act as
steward at this festival—wholly approving of the object,
which was one of pure charity to a deserving and unfortu-
nate class of persons, and to encourage an act which tended
very much not only to innocent recreation, but also to
humanize and soften the human disposition, and should
therefore be encouraged rather than discouraged. He had
most willingly acceded to having his name placed on
the list as one of the stewards, and he would as well
as he was able perform its duties. This was not
the first time these festivals had taken place in Westminster
Abbey ; on the contrary, it would be deviating from the
common course if they did not take place in the Abbey.
(Hear, hear, hear.) He had been present himself
upon two similar occasions in the cathedral of York,
when these festivals took place in the presence and with
the approbation of the primate of England. (Hear, hear. )
And when attempts had been made to express approbation
in the usual way, his grace stated to the audience that
that was not a place for such an exhibition. From that
instant there was neither approbation nor disapprobation
expressed. They had also before now taken place
in Westminster Abbey under the patronage of a
monarch, than whom there was never on the throne a
Prince more disposed to uphold the established religion of
the country. He regretted that the subject had been
brought forward, and ho sincerely hoped that it would
be allowed to drop, without further notice.—( Hear. )
After a few words from the Duke of NEWCASTLE,
the subject was dropped.

Some messages from the Commons, on private bills,
were brought up.
WARWICK DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
The house then proceeded to hear counsel and witnesses
on the Warwick Disfranchisement Bill.

Mr. HARRISON and Mr. Sergeant HEATH appeared in
support of the bill.
Mr. Sergeant MEREWETHER and Mr. FoLutrr ap-
peared for the petitioners against the bill.
The first witnesses examined were Mr. Greenway (Lord
Warwick's banker) and Mr. Brown (hislordship's steward).
The next witness examined was Charles Crockett, a
sawyer, with a view to show acts of treating.
Mr. FOLLETT declined cross-examining the witness.
Mr. HARRISON stated that he was not then prepared to
call any more witnesses.
The Earl of DURHAM then moved that the' further
proceedings on the bill' be postponed until Tuesday.
The LORD CHANCELLOR suggested that the exa-

mination of witnesses should be proceeded with at six
o'clock preeisely.
The house adjourned at a quarter to ten till Monday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 2.

The SPEAKER took the chair at a quarter-past five
o'clock.

Mr.DUNLOP brought up the report on the Dumbarton
Road Bill.
Sir 0. MOSLEY moved the second reading of the
Stafford Road Bill.—Agreed to.
Mr. O'CALLAGHAN moved the second reading of the
Tipperary Road Bill.—Agreed to.
Mr. B YNG presented a petition from the graziers o
Uxbridge, Middlesex, against the Islington Market Bill.—
Referred to committee.
DEATH OF 31R. R. LANDER.

Lord ask the First Lord of the
Admiralty if he had received any information respecting
the lamented death of Mr. Richard Lander ? If that oc-
currence implicated any persons connected with the slave
trade (Hear, hear) he (Lord M.) should think it would
be perfectly justifiable to employ armed steam-boats, or any
other:force that might be necessary to bring the offenders
to]condign punishment.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM replied, that a letter had been
received from an officer on board one of his Majesty's
ships of war, giving an account of the melancholy death of
Mr. Lander. It appeared from that letter that the event
took place 200 or 300 miles up the River Niger ; the
circumstances which immediately led to it arose out of an
ambuscade of the natives, and it would appear that some
persons connected with the slave trade were not wanting to
play their part; but as yet there was no confirmatory evi-
deride of the statement. It occurred, however, so far up the
country, that the force employed on the coast could not
possibly be of any service. His noble friend might depend
upon it that the matter would be properly investigated.
A message from the Lords announced that their Lord-
ships had agreed to the Marine Alliance Insurance Bill.
Sir EDARD KNATCHBULL put a question
to the noble lord the Secretary at War, relative
to the accounts that had been published respecting
the attacks made upon the British fishermen on the coast
of France ; a class of persons, it must be acknowledged,
worthy of the fullest protection government could afford.
Lord PALMERSTON replied, that instructions upon
the subject had been sent out to the English Ambassador
in France, but at present there was no answer received.