The Sun.
London, England, 1805-03-30 00:00:00

IMPERML PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF PEERS.
/FRIDAY, MARCH 29..
Mr. CLERIC was heard in continuation in the Appeal Blanc
against the Earl of Cassilis ; and the further nearing was
postpeTed to Monday.
The Legacy Bill was read a third time, and passed.
UNIVERSITY ADVOWSON BILL.
The Bishop of OXFORD moved the Order of the
Day for committing the Bill.
The Dear of NORFOLK observed, that this Bill
had now advanced to this stage of the Committee
without any explanation having been given of the
grounds on which it was introduced. The objet}
of the Bill was to repeal a clause of the Mortmain
Aet, an Aft introduced into Parliament by a Noble.
man I Lord HARDWICK!) on whose. distinguished
character it was unnecessary for him to dWell ; and
he thought any measure which proposed to alter that
ita deserved very" serious consideration. He
wished to know from the R.ev2Prelate, whether .he
meant to propose, in the Committee, any clause for
limiting the operation of the, Bill, or whether he in.
tended the Repeal to be. general.
The Bishop of OXFORD said, he had no Clause
to offer, and intended only to propose a few verbal
Amendments in the Committee. The nature of the
Bill was simple, and easily explained. By the
Mortmain Aft the Colleges of the Universities
were restrained' from purchasing any Advowsons
beyond the moiety of their Fellowships. He could
not see any mown for this restritlion. It did not
appear that there was any more impropriety in this
kind of property, when in a dormant state, being
purchased by the Colleges, than in its being ao-
quired by other Corporations. The encouragement
aforded to the Yellows of the Colleges was much
too small ; and' he thought their Lordships could
not withheld their assent from a Bill which had for
its objet so beneficial a purpose as affording a pro.
per encouragement to those who devoted their time
to the instruction of youth in the Universities.
Lord SIDMOUTLI would not give any opinion
at present on the Bill, but was of opinihn withjhe
Noble Duke opposite to him, that a measure which
proposed to repeal a Clause of the Mortsuain Aft,
introduced by Lord HAlLawicz,z, deserved matura,
consideration. He, therefore, suggested the post.
ponement of the Committee.
The LORD CHAIICII..LAR was also fur delaying
the commitment of the Bill.
Lord AUNCLAND thought, that before the
House could form an opinion on the Bill, it would
be necessary to have a return of the number and
value of the Livings at' present possessed by the
Colleges.
The 'Bishop of OXFORD said, that such a re.
turn could not be accurately mule, and made an
eloptent appeal to their Lordships on the necessity of
ameliorating the situation of the Fellows of Co!.
lege*.
Lord SIDMOUTH explained.
The Duke of NORFOLK saw no reason why an
Account of the irate of, the Livings vested in the
Colleges should not be produced. He supposed
that Fellows were not so entirely taken up with
Philosophy anti Divinity as not to be able to give
some account of the value of their incomes. fie
then moved, that the Bill be committed on Thurs.
day the 2d of May.
The LORD CII.4NCELLOR of IREL,IND
said, that there was a, great political advantage in
Livings being vested in individuals, rather than in
any clerical body. This mode', which prevailed
very much in this part of the United Kingdom,
formed,a bond of union hetween the Church and the
great families of the Country : it prevailed very lit.
tle, however, in that Country from which he had
just come. lie believed the account requited could
not b: easily obtained, and he thought the principal
point their Lordships had to consider was, the poli-
tical operation of the Bill.
After sonic farther conversation the Duke of
IsTotkFuLx withdrew his Motion. The Order for
committing the Bill was then fixed fur Thursday
next, and their Lordships were ordered to be sum.
moved.