The Sun.
London, England, 1833-06-07 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 7, 1833.

general good, enjoy the gratitude of their contemporaries
and of posterity."
The Journal de la Huye publishes with its number (;f
Ist June, a pamphlet containing the sentence pas,ed in
1504 by the Tribun:l at Malines, in a cane between tie
Count of Zealand on the one part, and the city of Ant
werp and the Estates of Brabant on the other. The sub-
ject in dispute was the toll levied on the Scheldt by the
Count. The people of Antwerp pretended that the river
was free, and they had remained in possession of this
Vberty, and that to " do otherwise would be the ruin and
destruction of the city of Antwerp."
It seems that, in consequence of great inundations, the
river Hondt has become navigable, and ships bound to
Brabant take that new channel to avoid paying the toll on
the Scheldt; but the Count, holing this to be the case,
established a toll on that new channel also, it being, as
well as the old branch, within his territory. It was this
point that the people of Antwerp and the States of Bra-
bant disputed, but the Tribunal decided in favour of tl:e
Count, and condemned the Stets of Brabant to pa,
18,000 gold Philips damages to the Count, and the city
of Antwerp 8,000.
DUTCH FUNDS—AMSTERDAM, JUNE 4.
Actual Debt, 2% per cent... ....... ....... 47,4 to 48
Amort Syndic, 454 per cent Bl% to 8214
Ditto, ditto, 3% per cent.
Voluntary Loan, 1831, 6 per cent lOll4 to 10:2 •
Ditto, 1832, 5 per Cent.
Ditto, 1833, 5 per Cent.
Exchange on London
Ditto, two months l2
Dutch Papers, June u.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNE 6

Lord ROSERERRY presented petitions from Edin-
bur;:h, for the abolition of slavery.
Lord GOWER presented petitions, for the better ob-
servance of the Sabbath, from various bodies of Dissenters.
ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.
All the Ministers having come in, and taken their place,
The Marquis of WELLESLEY, who appeared in tl,e
Windsor uniform, rose and said, he was commanded by

his Majesty to communicate his Majesty's answer to their
Lordships' Address of the 3d of June, which was as
follows :

" Jlr LORDS.-1 have already taken all such mea-
sures as appear to me to be necessary for maintaining
the neutrality which I had determined to observe in the
contest now going on in Portugal."
This short and pithy answer was received with the ut-
most silence, in a House quite as Cull as the one that voted
the Address.

The Bishop of EXETER presented a petition from
the Archdeaconry of Barnstaple, against the Iri,h Church
.Reform Bill. The petitioners also referred to the oldig,a-
tions imposed by the coronation oath ; but they doubted
not whatever was done would be consistent with it. Ir
was the duty of Ministers to observe the obligations of
the oath which his Majesty took at the coronation in any
measure which they might introduce.—(Hear.) The
Right Rev. Prelate then cited this well known passage in
the coronation oath :--" Will you, to the utmost in your
power, maintai❑ the laws of God, the true profession of
the Gospel, and the Protestant reformed religion, as by law
established ? and will yon preserve unto the bishops and
clergy of this realm, and to the churches committed to
their charge, all such rights and privileges as by law do
or shall appertain unto them or any of them ?" To which
his Majesty answered, " All this I promise to do."—
(Hear.) But this was not all, for after his Majesty had

thus solemnly sworn to observe the obligation, he pro-
ceeded to the altar, and joined in that solemn observance
of the church.—(Hear, hear.) He (the Right Rev. Pre-
late) would suppose that shortly after such an obligation
had been taken, if a Minister were to go to his Majesty in
the closet, and propose a Bill to bins which should not
only interfere with the property of that church whose
rights he had sworn should remain, but that it should
change the tenure of that property, making the Bishops no
longer proprietors—if such a Bill, too, should assail the
spir'tual character of time church, and take from the
B shops a considerable portion of their rights; nay, if it
s'.ould go to suppress one-half of the hierarchy in Ireland,
what, he might ask, would be the answer of the Sovereign?
what the feelings of the people that the conscience of their
Sovereign should be put to such a trial ? After a few
further observations the Right Rev. Prelate moved that
the petition be laid upo❑ the table.
Earl GREY was sorry that the question had then
been brought before the House, and in such a manner.
That, undoubtedly, was not the time for debating
the provisions of that Bill.—;Loud cries of " Hear.")
He trusted that when that Bill reached their Lordships'
House, it would be found that its provisions bore a very
different character to that which it had pleased the Rev.
Prelate to give them. Of the views with which the
Rev. Prelate had been actuated, in addressing their

Lordships, of course he was unacquainted, and would
impute no improper ones.—( Hear. ) But he must be
permitted to say that what had fallen from that Rev.
Prelate could by possibility answer ❑o good purpose. He
understood him to say in the first part of his speech, that
be would contend, that, considering the sacred obligations
which his Majesty at the Coronation had contracted with his
people, he would violate his oath by consenting to the Bill to
which he bad alluded. To the general proposition he certainly
would not object. It was undoub•edly the duty of Par-
liament carefully to look into the bearing and provisions

of any measure which vane before them, and he had no
doubt they would do so with the Bill in question, and see
that none of its provisions bore the character which the
Rev. Prelate had given to them, and that it would
not tend at all to violate the obligations of his 111a-
jmy. He (Earl Grey) had had occasion before to
argue the question of the Coronation oath, and he did
not expect again to have to answer objections to
it as respected a measure in progress through Parliament.
There was not a man in existence who was more ready
strictly to perform his duty, than was his Majesty to perform
those duties which he owed to his people, and to that church
which belonged to his people. Whatever the Rev. Pre-
late or others might think it their duty to say, there was
not a man who had more at heart the true interests of
' religion and of the Church, than the humble individual
who then addressed their Lordships, or any of those who
at present were called on to give their advice to their So-
vereign.—( Hear.) He did not like to make profes-
sions, hut when insinuations were thrown out, such
as their Lordships had just heard, he thought he
might be permitted to say that the Rev. Prelate himself
had not a more sincere or anxious desire to support the
true interests of religion than lie (Lord Grey) had. But
in the present circumstances of the country, his firm
opinion was that the Bill would not impair the
church, but very much tend to strengthen it. He was
sorry that the attempt to impose false opinions on their
Lordships as to the coronation oath had been revived.
He had, i❑ former times, quoted proofs that the
coronation oath did not apply to his Majesty in
his legislative, but in his executive capacity.—(Hear.)
He would again maintain that to be the true spirit and
meaning of the coronation oath, and he would then only
say that nothing was contained in any Bill that had been
introduced under his sanction, that could he truly stated
to be derogatory to his Majesty, or at all militating against
the coronation oath. The time would come when the
whole matter would be more properly discussed.
In the meantime he would only say to those
who professed an extraordinary zeal on the subject, that
they should take care that they were not pressing on such
measures as were likely to lead to the destruction of
that church which they so professed to love—that they
were not actually doing that which they charged upon
those who professed less on the subject. He would say
no more than merely again express his regret that the
Reverend Prelate bad take❑ a course so devoid of
wisdom—or he might say—even of tact. Having
said so much, he hoped to be allowed to say that he
would not again express his opinion on the subject, until
the matter was regularly before their Lordships.—(The
Noble Earl sat down amidst loud cheering.)
The Bishop of EXETER replied—He said that what
he expressed was, that whatever the opinion of his Majesty
might be respecting the coronation oath, he would at any
hazard act conscentiously. The Noble Earl had char nterized
his opinion as respected the coronation oath as false ; he
would not use harsh words, but he moat say that be
could not but smile with astonishment at the con-
fidence with which the Noble Earl gave his opinion
on the subject; he did rot mea❑ to use the term in any
offensive sense, but he must say that that opinion bad been
expressed in a most overbearing manner.
Some private Bilis were then put forward a stage and
the House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JUNE 6.

The SPEAKER took his seat at a few minutes past five

&clock.

Mr. D. BROWNE brought up the report of the Com-
mittee appointed to try the merits of the Galway county
election, which stated that James Daly, Esq., was duly
elected Member for the county, and that neither the peti.
tion nor the opposition to it, was frivolous or vexatious.
Mr. YOUNG presented a petition from the ship-owners
of Scarborough, complaining of the arrangement proposed
to be made for the reduction of the ditty on marine insu-
rances. Also a petition from the port of London to the
same effect. Also a petition from the shipwrights
of Scarborough, complaining of the injury they sustained
by that clause of the Act of Parliament respecting the
repairing of ships in foreign ports.
Mr. H. GRATTAN, in consequence of there having
been no House for the last two ❑ights, wished to know
from his Majesty's Alinisters what they meant to do re-
specting the subject of tithes, particularly as there was a
Gallant Officer the❑ in his place who had only returned
from Ireland a few days ago. This was absolutely neces-
sary, as the harshest proceedings were now resorted to in
Ireland for the purpose of compelling the payment of the
tithe arrears.
Lord ALTHORP said it was true that the Bill of last
session had made money to be made in this way a Crown
debt ; and it was law in England as well as in Ireland
that for the recovery of a Crown debt, houses might be
entered at any time. This, however, would not be
done any more at present, because directions bad