The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-25 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

When made in i upFrom what
PLACES. General Post.Ofilce I port dia..When
London. I patched. due.
—....._.....--_—.—_. --_—____•,---• ............—..-
America (by Brit. pkt.)NiJune 27 (
America (by U.S. pkt.) N July 1
.. •• .. ..
Liverpool • • July 5
America (by U.S. pkt.) M July 2
.• .. ,Liverpool ..I July 2
So
Africa (West coast).. N 14th of the month
.... Plym uthampt. June 26
outh July 3
Alexandriat.... N 19th & 30th of mo. Dover • .
Belgium • • • • .. N Daily ~.• .. Dover .. June 21
Da
• Brasil .. . • .. M 9th of the month Southampt. Julyily
12
• Buenos Ayres .. .. M 9th of the month Southampt. July 12
. Callfornia(viaChagres)M Id & 17th of month South:m:lot. July 5
Cape of Good Rope N 14th of month Plyino Uttl.. July 3
Constantinople* .. •• 24 7th 17th 27th of mo Dover .. June
Central America .. M 24 & 17th of mon. Southampt. July b3O
Channel Isles .. .. N Mon., Wed., & Fri. Southarapt. Tn. Th.Sa
Chili .. .. „, .15 17th of the month Southampt. July 90
France .. .. M &Ni Twice daily .. .. Dover • • Greece* • • . .. N 7th 17 th 27th ef mo Dover • . June 30
une 30
}lamburgh •
.. .. N Tuesday & Friday London
.. Tues. Sat.
Rolland .. ..
.. kWednes. & Satur.,Lorhien .. Mos. Thur
Honduras .. .. . 17117th of the moathlSouthampt. July 20
Ireland .. .. M& N Twice daily .. .. Holyhead .• Twicedally
India(via Southamp.) M 20th of the sionth'SoutharepL July 43
India (viaMarsellies) N 7th& 24th efmonth Dover • • 'July 1
Mediterranean (via 1
Southampton) .. M,2oth of the month Sonthampt. July 23
Mediterranean (via I
Marseilles) .. .. 1717th& 2491 ofmonth Dover Mexico • . July
.. .. .. 31/2d of the month ../Southampt. ~ July 6
Madeira .. .. .. M.9th of the month ilSoDutohvaemr pt. July 12
r ,7th,l7th,l9th
25
Malta:, • • ..
. NT
NVst&h3lostthh,Dover 0f25 trnho,onfm27ththo
.. July 2
Naples .. .. .
Southampt. 'June 26
Peninsular.. • • .. 3.N, ,75tthh1175,thh
2275tthhoeff
mm
00l Dover .. July 2
3,5 t
Tuscany* .. .. .. N,
sth
M 17th of the month Southamot. (July 20
' h 15th 25 tll of mo, Do ver .. July 2
rPearupal
.S.tate.s: ::

Bristol In
Vcr. D . At the Court, Basingball-street.
July 15. at ele
ale, London-wall, City, boot and shoe maker,
the Country.
July 15, at h„Tt'n--J. Shelford, Hertfordshire, butcher,
4u-past eleven.
1
J. Carter,
JCuoluyrtl.s,Bartia,tniel—vonli:
at
Bristol, July 17, at eleven, at the
taovurt, Liverpool.
hCo Liverpool, dealer in paint,
DIVIDENDS.
PAYMENT
y. City, elothie
and one, at the office of mr.4elts between eleven
betW m. Serhcahwanatsn,d2oBs..,SohnawainS3,4l,4ndleworth, Yorkshire, tim.
ajndewtrhree &b owing Thu
ter, George-street,
Manchester.
ls. 3d., on
ThGur.sCd oi
yu , r tile
ue
ny
e, 026 l d,
tween eleven and two, at the office of rs'aYs, mar.be-
Stanefeld, I
Easingliall-street.
W. Smith, Curtain-road, timber merchant, 23
Thursday, June 26, and three following Thursdaya,"4°
be-
tween eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Stansfeld,
13asinghall-street.
S. Eenton, Fore-street, City, linendraper, lid., on
Thursday, June 26, and three following Thursdays, be-
tween eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Stansfeld,
Basinghall-street. A Puzzt, ---
J. Dawson, Northfleet, Mitre-court Chambers, Temple, rented to his A domestic, newly engaged, pre-
and Clement-lane, chip-owner, 28. 6d., on Thursday, of one of whireTlSwter, one morning, a pair of boots, the leg
comes Avon ranset4asich longer than the other. "How
JULIO 26, and three following Thursdays, between eleven
length?' that these boots are not of the same
and two, at the office of Mr. Stansfeld, Basin 11 11- t t.
g a s ree " I really d
W. Dickens Isleworth, grocer and cheesemonger, the most is, that the on dorm, Sir, but what bothers me
pair stairs are in the sa e fix
en Thursday, June 26, and three following THB POTENTIAL MO m
Thar .
Graham rsdays, between eleven and two, at the office of Mr. joined without invitation a OD.—An Oxford student
art • • Coleman-street. which he boasted so much ofPhisy dining at an inn, after
J. Fo • "You have told us e abilities, that one of the
rd, Richmond, licensed victualler 2id on Thurs- Party said,
day, JUne 26, 64c1 or • ' '' tell us something you cannot don?,ngli of what you can do,
ee following Thursdays, between . 46 •,, „ .
cannot pay Key share of the rsick9/441. K.,. mwa, stud he, " I

Naples* ..
Papal States*
Peninsular..

Dover IJuly 2
Dover . July 2
ISoutbampt. 'June 26
/Southamut. (July 20
Dover .. July 2
ISoutbarapt.lJuly 20
Southampt.lJuly 6
:ed (*) are conveyed by

Peru ..
Tuscany*

West 3f;l7th of the month
West Indies (except I
Havanna & Nassau) Mild of the month ..
* The mails to those countries thus marl
French packet vi{ Marseilles

CA.LlFonms.—Malls to
are now despatched and di

and from Callfornl
lue by every Amer!,

via the United states
n packet.

GLASGOW AND SOLITIII- WESTERN RAILWAY...-. Tullio for
the Week ending June 21, 1851:
Glasgow,
Passengers (21,129), Goods, Bic.,
.ind Horses and Carriages ... Z 3,812 3 8
Corresponding week in last year
for Glasgow and Ayr and Glas-
gow,June 23, 1851.
Damfries, and; Carlisle
Railways ... ••• £2,756 9 1

CERTIFICATES GRANTED.
J. Burrell,:Blackmore, Essex, victualler, certificate of
the third class—W. M'Dowall, Little Queen-street,
Lincoln's Inn-fields, printer, certificate of the third class
—R. Gadesden, Brompton-square, coal-merchant, certi-
ficate of.,the: third:class—Mary Astle, J. T. Astle, and
C. Ante, Cloak•lane and Coleman-street, bookbinders,
certificates of the third class—J. Fletcher, Haslingden,
Lancashire, hardware dealer, certificate of the second
class—J. M'Lean, Liverpool, commission merchant,
certificate of the first class, after twenty-one days from
June 19—R. Blacker, Ripon, Yorkshire, innkeeper,
certificate of the second class, after twenty-one days
from June 19,

PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.
J. Massey, Neptune street, Wandsworth, and T.
Umpelby, High-street, Lambeth, potters—W. &life and
J. Hunter, Bradford, Yorkshire, coach proprietors—T.
Milward and J. Southey, Uffculm, Devonshire, millers
—W. Brotherton, J. Bryan, and J. Peto, Hungerford•
wharf, oil merchants (so far as regards the said W.
Brotherton)—J. H. Langworthy and T. Pratt, Farm-
street, Berkeley-square, and Gloucester-maws East,
King-street, Portman-square, veterinary surgeons—R.
Dent:and. W. W. Page, Leamington Priors Warwick-
shire, drapers—J. Bewley and T. W. Lisher, Beech-
street, Barbican, varnish manufacturers—J. Tattersall
and F. Pilling, Salford, Lancashire, machine makers—
J. Blake and W. Short, Liverpool, ship chandlers—W.
Parsons, Colchester-street, Whitechapel, and D. Ed-
wards, Haverstock street, Hampstead-road, builders—
G. Leeds, D. Morley, and J. Booth, Hulme Manches-
ter, small ware manufacturers (so far as regards the said
G. Leeds)—G. Day and E. Burman, Dewsbury, York-
shire, millwrights—W. Dowell and G. Dowell, Wapping-
wall, grocers—J. B. Pigott and R. N. Newton, Barnsley,
Yorkshire, linen manufacturers—Ellen Thackeray and
J. Thackeray, Radford, Nottinghamshire, cotton
doublers—S. Binsted and J. W. Prebble, Rotherhithe,
New-road, japanners—P. Griffith, T. W. Griffith, and
-E. L. Griffith, Pall-mall, wine merchants.
INSOLVENT PETITIONERS.
, Edward Shelley, Liverpool, ale and porter dealer.
John Jones, Liverpool, agent.
Samuel Genese, Liverpool, auctioneer.
James Wood, Liverpool, assistant master.
Henry Liversedge, Liverpool, beerhouse keeper.
Thomas Duke, Liverpool, beenhouse keeper.
John SKIT, Liverpool, clerk.
John Douglas Robinson, Liverpool, passenger broker.
Robert Milward, Worcestershire, beerhouse keeper.
Samuel Beard, Shropshire, labourer.
William Lediard, Worcester, cabinetmaker.
James Greenough, Lancashire, druggist's assistant.
Joseph Morris, Sussex, lodging house keeper.
James Gibson, Northumberland, painter.
Charles Hall, Portsmouth, beer seller.
Walter Scott, Southampton, printer.
George Hough, Huddersfield, corn miller.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.
A. Drysdale, Edinburgh, silk warehouseman,' to meet
at the Ship Hotel, Edinburgh, June 30 and July 28, al
two.

W. Thomson,
withinburh, writer, to meet the
Temperance Hotel Edin, Edinbugrgh, June 30 and July 21, at
twelve.

J. Campbell, Rothesay, joiner, to meet within Kin,
loch's Hotel, Rothesay, July 2 and July 30, at one.

REFORM IN THE FEMALE COSTUME.
Last Thursday Mrs. Smith gave a public lecture on
dress and its relations, both hygienic and social, with
reference to the present and future fashions, at Hope
Chapel, Broadway. There was a very large and
fashionable audience; indeed, the lecture-room was
filled to its utmost extent. Mrs. Smith, after making
some preliminary remarks said that ladies should
at least, consult their comfort and health—that one
cannot exist without the other—but at present woman
was the creature of sunshine, and she sacrificed all to
prevailing fashions and conventional forms. We
understood her then to say that there was phi-
losophy in dress as in all other things; and that
it should be observed that the dress now coming
into use was adapted to all kinds of weather, and it was
especially adapted to out-door purposes ; " but," added
she, " let my sisters by all means preserve the long
robe for parlour purposes; for the sake, however, of
their comfort and for the sake of humanity, let them
adopt the new style. In articles of dress it is time that
women should begin to disenthral themselves from
vulgar customs, and think for themselves, at least in
articles of dress, and consult their own comfort and hap-
piness, and, I may say, the happiness of those
who come after them, evea though they should for
the present be sneered at by the press. The costume
now being introduced is adapted to our institutions.
" Why should we," said Mrs. Smith, "care
for what is worn in profligate courts? We should
seek for what is healthful, and what will contribute
to our cemfert, and adopt it. We, the daughters
of this Republic, why should we be the slaves of foreign
fashions?—(Applause.) Let us come near to something
that will contribute to our comfort and health, It
would be curious (said she) to investigate the laws
which have precluded woman from assuming the manly
costume, but perhaps it would be found to arise from
the different organization of the sexes." Here she
admitted that there should always be a distinctive
character in the costume of the sexes. She then went
on to describe the various fashions of different ages,
and their inconvenience and danger to health. "But
you," said she, addressing herself to the ladies,
`have no right to destroy God's handiwork." It was a
duty they owed, not only to themselves but to their
posterity, to adopt whatever gave the freest action to
their limbs. As yet they were the slaves of fashion
and custom, which was in some measure to be attri-
buted to milliners and tailors. " We mast (said she) have
a dress easy of adjustment ; such a one as a lady can
put on without calling in the assistance of her neigh-
bours." Mrs. Smith then recommended the French
hat and Turkish trousers, but not so short as to trans-
form a woman into a figurante. Over this robe a Gre-
cian jacket, which may be adapted to the taste and
wealth of the wearer. Such a dress would give grace
and elegance to the person, and she who wears it would
walk with more ease and breathe freer. Public opinion
was in favour of them, and they should take advantage
of it. Mrs. Smith was loudly applauded during the
delivery of several passages of her address.—New York
Herald.

SEABORNE MAILS.
[N signifies that the malls are sent trona the General P ee
by the night—and Mby the morning—dispatch.]

HOUSE OF LORDS, June 24.
The LORD CUANCELLOR took his seat upon the Wool
sack at Five o'clock.

PETITIONS.
Lord STANLEY presented petitions against the
Sites of Churches Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the
Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce, praying for a re-
form of the patent laws ; a petition from Kidder-
minster with a similar prayer; also a petition from the
members of the National Land Company, complaining
of the conduct of a Member of Parliament, in conse-
quence of which they had suffered grievous hardships;
and a petition against the Police of Towns Act.
APPRENTICES TO SEA. SERVICE (IRELAND)
BILL.
On the motion of the Marquis of CLANRICARDE
this Bill went through Committee.
PREVENTION OF OFFENCES BILL.
Lord CAMPBELL said that this Bill had been sent
back by the Commons amended by the insertion of a
clause punishing persons more effectually who placed
obstacles on railways. He moved that the amendments
be agreed to.
The amendments were agreed to accordingly.
SCHOOL SITES AMENDMENT BILL.
On the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE this
Bill was read a third time and passed.
CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.
Lord STANLEY gave notice that he should post-
pone his motion on this subject, until Monday, and that
he should move that the papers be referred to a Select
ICommittee. It was his intention to take the sense of
the House on the subject.
SOUTH-WESTERN (IRELAND) RAILWAY BILL.
Lord HONTEAGLE presented a petition from the
landowners of the county of Kerry, praying that they
might be permitted to give a guarantee for money lent
to the railway company out of the county rates.
Lord REDESDALE was opposed to the principle of
landed proprietors being called on to guarantee railway
shareholders.
Lord BEAUMONT said that in this instance the
landowners prayed to be permitted to give the guarantee.
CASE OF JOTEE PERSHAUD.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGU moved for the pro-
duction of the charges against Jotee Pershaud, an army
contractor in India, and of the verdict given on the trial.
Jotee Pershaud was no ordinary person. His
father had long been connected with the Indian
Government, and Jotee Pershaud had continued
to take contracts for the supply of the Indian
army. He had contracted to find the army
of the Satlej, and never had army been better provided,
and in the last war in the Punjaub he had contracted
to provide the army in provisions and horses, and that
army was always well supplied, whilst the enemy had
been compelled to surrender for want of provisions. He
was always at head-quarters and had agents in all parts
of India, over whose conduct of course he could not ex-
ercise aty control. He was a man of gentlemanly
emeanour and had performed great services, yet at
the end of the war he had had charges
of the gravest character brought against him. Now,
nothing could be more dangerous than to bring grave
charges against a man who had performed great services
without being very certain that such charges could be
proved. Now he stated upon the most high authority, that
it would have been very difficult to carry on operations
effectually if Jotee Pershaud had not had the manage-
ment of tae commissariat. The charges against Jotee
Pershaud had been referred to the military authorities,
and they lad reported that those charges were frivolous
and vexatious, and had recommended that they should
not be followed up. This report was sent to the military
board, and the military board was divided in opinion as
to its adoption. It was not, however, equally divided;
for two of the Members concurred with the conclusion of
Major Ransey, while the other thought that the whole
matter should be referred to the President in Coun-
cil. On the 19th January, 1850, accordingly, reference
was made of the matter to the president in council, and
on the 15thof February following the President in Coun-
cil referred the case to the Lieutenant-Governor of the
north-western provinces. On the 11 th of March the
Lieutenant-Governor further referred it to the magistrate
of Agra, who made his report on it on the 27th of
June. Other reports were also made, one on the 9th
and one on the 12th of July, by two other gentlemen,
civil agents, engaged in the investigation of parts of
the charge. After the first report was presented
it was withdrawn, and the report of one of these gen-
tlemen substituted in its place; because it had been
discovered is the meanwhile that, unfortunately, the ma-
gistrate of Agra, to whom it had been referred, was a
debtor in a large amount to Jotee Persaud. On that
account the further prosecution of the inquiry was con-
fided to another person, who, on the 7th of November,
made a final report upon the case. The lieutenant-
governor thereupon directed the prosecution to proceed
as against Jotee Persaud, which was confirmed by the
Governor-General. All this while, however, the Go-
vernor-General of India appeared to be without any
cognizance of the early proceedings in this case. In
January and February, 1850, the Governor-General was
at sea, oft his voyage from Bombay or to the eastern
islands, and he could not therefore have cognizance of
this part of the proceedings. In fact he only became so
when the final report was nude. The trial took place
on the 27th of March, and, after twenty days' trial, the
accused was acquitted. He (the Earl of Ellenborough)
should state that in September, 1850, after he had been
arraigned, Jotee Pershaud proceeded to Calcutta and
instituted a civil suit for 578,000/., the balance of his
claim against the Government. This was a proceeding
grounded on misapprehension and ill-advised. Because
if it had been brought at first it would not have been
competent for the Government to interpose a criminal
prosecution while a civil suit was pending. He (the
Earl of Ellenborough) did not think it very extraordi •
nary that Jotee Pershaud, seeing that he was to be tried
under the new Act in the Mofussil court by a judge and
jury appointed by the Government, and seeing the way
in which the trial was to be got up, should prefer a
trial in the Supreme Court to a trial at bar. He thought
the President of the Council coai.mitted a great error
when he did not adhere to the opinion of the majority
of the military board, and not proceed further with the
inquiry. But he thought the proceedings from the first
founded in error as to the course the Government ought
to pursue. That course should have been to direct the
military accounts to be investigated, to pay to Jotee
Pershaud what they believed to be due to him, and leave
him to bring his action fur whatever balance he might
deem due to himself. But undoubtedly they were grave
charges which were brought against the persons who
were concerned in those transactions. He understood
that the witnesses against Jotee Pershaud were per-
sons who had been concerned in the military con-
tracts, and that they had been brought by force under
the escort of the police to Agra; that at first their evi-
dence Was in favour of Jotes Pershaud, that they were
then threatened with prosecution fur their own mal-
practices, but were also told that if they made a full
confession they would be pardoned, and some of the wit-
nesses were kept in durance until the trial commenced.
The whole of the evidence, too, on which he was ar-
rainged was evidence taken in his absence. Jotee Per-
shaud in the meantime went to Calcutta, and not having
returned at the expiry of his term of bail his recog-
nizance, were estreated, and Mr. Laing, who was his ad-
vocate and also his bailsman, instead of having his goods
seized, had an embargo laid upon his press—for he was
the editor of a newspaper—the object being to stop the
mouth of the paper. In this country how great would
be the indignation excited if a party were to enter the
bedroom of a lady and seize her jewels; but in India to
violate the sanctity of the zenana of a Hindoo was cal-
culated to excite not merely the indignation of the
people, bat to raise a spirit of insurrection from one end
of the country to the other. It was an offence never
to be forgiven, and if they disregarded the opinions and
feelings of the people in matters of that kind they
might be sure their dominion in India would not be
worth a fortnight's purchase. Ho thought he had es-
tablished sufficient grounds for the production of the
papers he had moved for.
Lord BROUGHTON said that the Noble Earl bad
given an accurate account of the early part of the pro-
ceedings to which he had alluded. But there was this
inconvenience in discussing the adbject in the present
state of their information, that the official documents
which had reached him did not come down to the par-
ticular transactions to which the Noble Earl had espe-
cially alluded, and which he thought most worthy of
censure. He was happy to find that the charges which
in the first instance were brought against the Govern-
ment of India had not been repeated by the Noble
Lord; that, on the contrary, he had the candour and
straightforwardness to state, that the charge against the
Government of having instituted the criminal investiga-
tion for the purpose of putting a stop to the civil suit
was wholly without foundation. The contrary was the
fact; the civil suit was not instituted until a great part
of the criminal investigation had been proceeded with.
t investigate
The facts were shortly these:—On the 30th of March,
1849, a native contractor sent a communication
to the authorities, charging Jotee Pershaud with
fraud, egmatbeerslement, and forgery. A military
board, consisting of three members, was appointed
o esti
the
that
tmatter,ha
charges and two
were naneomt b ers
sufficientlyo of th e board reported
well founded to be worthy of being further prosecuted;
the third officer, however, being of a contrary opinion,
and Sir John Littler, the Governor of the north-western
province, on receiving those two different opinions,
ordered the investigation to be pursued. The inquiry
was put into the hands of Mr. Denison, who, after ex-
amining the accounts, reported that he bad discovered a
false charge far 4,400 bullocks, which had never been
used, and also that another false charge for 2,500 bul-
locks had only been withdrawn on the announcement
of the inquiry
inquiry having been instituted. Subsequently the
was put into the hands of Mr. Cumming, who
reported that he had examined all the proceedings and
all the witnesses, and that he was fully satisfied there
existed the most extensive frauds. It was true that Mr.
Denison on a former occasion had borrowed a sum of money
from Jotee Pershaud, with which he purchased a house;
which, however, he had subsequently mortgaged to him
for the money thus lent, and before the close of the
investigation the money was repaid. But when Lord
Dalhousie became acquainted with the affair he at once
ordered the investigation to be entrusted to other hands.
Two other magistrates also investigated the charges, and
reported that they had discovered frauds of great extent.
That was in July, 1850, and up to that time there had
been no hint, on the part of Jotee Pershaud or his ad-
visers, of an intention to proceed by civil suit to recover
in the Supreme Court balances alleged to be due to him.
It was not till after the commencement of the criminal
investigation that such an intention was announced.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH—After his arrest.
Lord BROUGHTON—The amount of those balances
was set down at 570,0001., and respecting them Colonel
Newbold, the assistant commissary-general, expressed
his surprise at such a demand, as no previous claim had
been made by Jotee Pershaud. But, to show the spirit
of fairness in which the winks %flair was conducted, he

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 24.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
SMI 111 FIELD MARKET REMOVAL BILL.
On the motion for the third reading,
Mr. STAFFORD protested against the Bill, but inti-
mated that it was not his intention to divide the House
on the motion for the third reading. He hoped the Bill
would meet with a different fate in another place.
Mr. HUME thought the House had proceeded in a
rash and inconsiderate manner, in agreeing to this Bill,
which in his opinion stigmatized and disgraced the first
municipal corporation in the country. He moved that
the Bill be read a third time this day six months.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS rose to second the amendment,
believing that his constituents would be very seriously
injured by this Bill.
Sir G. GREY defended the Bill, and called upon the
House to adhere to his former decisions on this Bill,
and read it a third time. There was no desire to exclude
the city of London from the management of the new
market; but, on the contrary, he yet entertained hopes
that eventually the Corporation would be induced to un-
dertake its entire control.
Sir JAMES DUKE repeated that the City was dis-
posed to make the existing market almost a free market,
besides considerably increasing its size and improving its
details, and he therefore could not help feeling that there
was no necessity for this. He insisted that the Govern-
ment ought to give the House some idea of the number
of acres that would be required for the new market if
they were not prepared to name where its site would be.
Again, he protested against the Bill, and trusted it
would be thrown out elsewhere.
Mr. CARD WELL supported the Bill. He denied
that the Select Committee who considered the
matter had not dono ample justice to the City.
They gave the Corporation a fair hearing, and
he ventured to assert that when the public came
to look fairly at the question they would agree that the
Committee had arrived at a just conclusion.
Sir 11. VERNEY contended that Smithfield was a
great nuisance, and its removal was imperatively de-
manded by the wants and wishes of the public.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE thought it:was for the advantage of
the public that the market should be in the centre of the
metropolis, rather than five miles to the north. It was
not strictly correct to say that the city of London was
fairly treated either by the Bill or the Government,
because how could they undertake the management of
a market which they knew nothing of?
Then House then divided, when there appeared—
For the third reading
... 81
Against it
..• 32
Majority
... The Bill was then read a third time and passed 49
.
CHURCH BUILDING ACTS AMENDMENT BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this Bill,
Mr. HUME asked what the object of the measure was.
Sir G. GREY said the Bill proposed to facilitate the
erection of churches in populous districts, and make pro-
vision for their endowment by the sale of pew rents.
Mr. HUME complained that there was one clause in
the Bill which would have the effect of preventing parties
from building churches unless they allowed the bishop
of the diocese to nominate the clergyman. The Bishop
of London and others of his class made a great
noise about the spiritual destitution of parti-
cular districts, and yet they promoted Bills of this
description, which were little better than a robbery on
the public and the poor. It would have the
effect of
taking away one.half of the free seats in all churches
that have been built by voluntary contribution.
Sir GEORGE GREY said he should have no objec-
tion to take that clause out.
Mr. HUME was glad of it, but even that would
to himwouldn
not
remove his objection to the Bill; and
itappeared
to be a measure that ought to be referredtotheeoi
deration of a Select Committee. This mode
the of
tha
Epso
toar?
legisla-
tion, in defiance of the wishes adnesdtrwnanntosnof of
would before long lead to the destruction
blished Church, and he should propose that it be read a
second time this day six months.
Sir B. HALL said
populous
clause in the Bill for
the sub-division of
one, but the Bill went considerably beyond
was a good
beyond that, and the
House should pause before they read it a second time.
This was not the first occasionor w
in ahifcohrmaeßrilslesosfiotnbia
similar
this
nature had been introduced;
f
Bill was brought in, which would have had the
e
ffect, had it passed, of considerably increasing church
rates, and this Bill was like that, the Bill of the Bishop
of London.
Its real object was to tax the free seats
of
existing churches. His Hon. Friend the Member for
Montrose had truly stated that no private individual was
allowed to build a church withoul endowing it, and the