The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-30 00:00:00

and are in fact now making, to defeat the
government plan. In short, unless the mini-
sters are prepared to give up the principle
of an established church, it does not seem
as though any measures they can propose will
be acceptable to the united committee, or the.
still more ultra party among the dissenters.
The methodists are divided on this question, and
so are the unitarians.

The Patriot, which the United Committee
are said to have made their organ, declares that
" there has come over mens' minds a deep and
settled conviction that until that greatest of all
schismatics the Church of England, is brought
down from her high estate, and placed on a
level with her brethren, sectarianism and strife
will never cease to distract the bosom of Eng-
land ; that until the patronage of the church is
wrested from the grasp both of the Govern-
ment and the Aristocracy, and given to the
people, the Gospel in all its power and purity
will never cover the length and breadth of the
land. Right or wrong these are the prevailing
sentiments of the great mass of Dissenters."
Here the object is plainly avowed—the patronage
of the Church is to be wrested from the grasp
both of the Government and the Aristocracy,
and given to the people. But how is this to
be effected ? In what way are the people
to get the patronage ? And what se-
curity is there that if they had it they
would use it better than the Government
or the aristocracy use it ? By what portion
of the people is it to be exercised if not by all ?
But if were we to admit that to obtain for the
people the patronage of the church is really the
desire and design of " the great mass of Dis•
senters," and that they have the power to
wrest it from the Government and the aristo-
cracy, then we do not see what objection they
can have to the maintenance of the churches by
means of a charge on the land tax. The build-
ings are not the worse for having been used for
centuries as places of worship. It is not on
this account that they should either be given
up to " a sect," or allowed to fall into decay. -
Wishing well to both churchmen and dissen-
ters, and considering that charity and peace are
above all things to be sought after by those who
profess to be guided by christian principles, we
had hoped that the grievances of the dissenters
might have been redressed, as others have
been, without provoking a contest, the iswe
of which must be, at least for some time, doubt-
ful, between the church on the one hand,
and the various denominations of dissen-
ters, on the other. But it would seem that
this is not to be permitted. We had imagined that
the buildings now used by the Episcopalians
being the property, not of individuals or of any
corporation, but of the nation, might have been
kept in repair at the public expense, in the
same way that other public buildings are ; and
that the time might arrive when divisions between
Christians being at an end, the buildings might
be used for the whole body of Christian wor-
shippers. Some Dissenters, however, appear
rather to desire to throw them into the hands of
the Episcopalians, and that Parliament should
give up the control it now exercises over the
affairs of the church. If this is not meant by
separating the church from the state, we are
at a loss to know what is. It cannot be meant
that the KING, the Peers, or the members of
the House of Commons, shall not, as indivi-
duals, be members of the church ; and if in
their collective capacity they are not to exer-
cise control over the affairs of the church, which
is, we believe, what many of the clergy desire,
the latter will be left in perpetual possession
of churches, tithes, glebe-lands, parsonage-
houses, public-schools, and endowments. The
church will then, indeed, be unconnected with the
state, but will patronage cease, or will the na-
tion gain anything by having the clergy as a
formidable, wealthy, and compact corporation,
instead of possessing, as now, the power of
controlling them, and disposing of the eccle-
siastical revenues in a manner the most likely to
promote the public welfare ?
The Government will probably, however, act
in this matter as they did with respect to the
abolition of slavery—they will do what is
just between the contending parties ; and if
they should be equally successful, it will be
well for the peace of the community.

Lord GREY, Lord JOHN RUSSELL, and
Lord ALTHORP, have declared that they are,
from conviction, resolved .to support the Esta-
blished Church ; but if they were not, it is
clear that neither the House of Lords nor the
Commons are prepared to carry out the prin-
ciples of the Dissenters. What can be the
object of the latter in calling on the Govern-
ment to do that which they know to be impos-
sible ? There is no OLIVER CROMWELL in
the army at present, nor are -there men among
the Dissenters such as those who composed the
Long Parliament. Yet they failed, because
they sought that which was impracticable, and
which, if desirable, was not to be secured by
the means they employed. The Dissenters must
first convince the nation that they seek only
what would be advantageous to the whole peo-
ple, and they must employ no unworthy means
to obtain even that.

COURT OF CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

IN RE CHARLOTTE EVANS, A LUNATIC.

Mr. PHILLIMORE supported a petition presented by the
two brothers of the lunatic, who were now her committees.
The petition stated that the lunatic had married very
considerably below her station in life ; that she had one
son, thirteen years of age, alive ; that her husband had been
her committee ; that he had died, leaving debts to the
amount of 4501. beyond what the property he had left
would meet, which were stated by the petition to have
been incurred for necessary expenses for himself, his fa-
mily, servants, &c. ; that the lunatic's original income was
from the dividends of 2,000/. but that lately she had had
a considerable accession of fortune left to her ; and the
prayer was that the 4501. might be ordered to be paid out
of the general estate.

The-Loup CHANCELLOR thought that to grant the
prayer would be deviating from every rule of practice, and
against all the principles that regulated the proceedings
in lunacy. It was not at all improbable but that if an
application had been made to the Court an additional
allowance for maintenance would have been granted to the
committee in the circumstances, but as it was the prayer
must be refused.

IN RE WARREN PEARCE, A LUNATIC.
Mr. SwlNsTow obtained the usual order under the
statute for the appointment of another person to act in the
room of Mr. Pearce, who had become a lunatic, as a
trustee with two other gentlemen, the lunatic having been
a trustee.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

THIS DAY, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at a quarter after twelve
o'clock.

Mr. CLAY presented a petition from the inhabitants of
the Tower Hamlets, against the Islington Market Bill.
Mr. DUNLOP presented a petition from Port Glasgow
in favour of the Wishaw Railway Bill; also, a petition
from Edinburgh, against the Edinburgh Police Bill.
Mr. PENDARVES presented a petition from Corn-
wall, against the Hayle Railway Bill.
Mr. C. BURRELL presented a petition from several
parishes in Sussex, against the Beer Bill ; also a petition
from the Isle of Ely, praying for the better observance of
the Sabbath ; and a petition from the magistrates and
gentry of the town and neighbourhood of Guildford, in
Surrey, praying for the renewal of the Labour Rate Act.
The hon. baronet gave notice that, on the house going into
committee on the Poor Laws' Amendment Bill, he
would propose an amendment, founded upon the suggestions
of men practically acquainted with the subject. He hoped
hon. members would make themselves thoroughly
acquainted with the subject before coming to a vote on it.
The hon. baronet concluded by expressing it as his opinion
that the re-enactment of the Labour Rate Act would be
of the greatest benefit to the agricultural districts.
Mr. CLAY said, experience would not justify the house
in recommitting the management of paupers to country
justices. The labour rate was the cause of all the evils ;
interfering with capital, private property, and destroying
the spirit of industry.
Lord G. LENNOX concurred in the same observa-
tions, and said he had a petition from Sussex on this sub-
ject in his possession before Easter, but had not yet had an
opportunity of presenting it.
After a few words from Mr. F. PALMER, Mr. HAL-
COMB, and other hon. members, in support of an altera-
tion in the present system of the poor laws, the petition
was laid on the table.

Mr. SLANEY said the proposed measure might be
useful for a short time, but the report of the Commis-
sioners would shew why they recommended it. The wel-
fare of the country was greatly bound up with this mea-
sure, and if it should pass it would be the duty and interest
of every man to come forward generously to give employ-
ment to those who might for a short period suffer.
Sir C. BURRELL explained.
. .

Mr. FOLEY presented petitions in favour of the better
observance of the Sabbath from Trowbridge, Bradford, and
other places--Laid on the table.
Mr. COLLIER presented petitions to the same effect
from Plymouth and other places—Laid on the table.
Mr. BLACKBURN presented a petition to the same
effect from several clergymen of Huddersfield, &c. ; one
from several beer shopkeepers of Huddersfield, for an al-
teration in the laws affecting them ; and one, signed by
8,000 persons of Huddersfield, against beer shops.
Laid on the table.

Mr. LYALL presented a petition from St. Lawrence and
St. Mary Magdalen, city of London, on the subject of
tithes, praying that such alterations may be effected as
would relieve the country, and preserve the rights of the
church unimpaired ; also one from St. Stephen's parish,
London, for a better observance of the Sabbath-day.
Laid on the table.

Mr. ROEBUCK presented petitions on various sub-
jects---one from the dissenters, claiming to be exempted
from church-rates ; one deprecating the taxes on knowledge;
one to do away with the use of sweeping boys ; one on
the subject of national education ; one from an individual
named George R. Stephens, residing in the county of
Bucks, complaining of certain deficiencies in the reform
till, as applicable to many constitutional privileges of the
subject ; one from a person named Keating, on a private
grievance ; and one from his constituents atßath,complaining
of the 6d. contributed by seamen towards Greenwich
Hospital ; one in favour of the Dorsetshire convicts. The
hon. member said, that he was convinced that the latter
were punished because they were members of the trades'
unions.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY said, that it was asserted by a
right hon. gentleman that he (Mr. Harvey) was soli-
citor to the unions. That he (Mr. Harvey) denied.
Concerning the subject of those men who were convicted in
Dorsetshire, he was of opiuion that they were illegally con-
victed, and unwarrantly punished. The hon. member pro-
ceeded to read the address of the judge who presided at the
trial of those men, and contended that he that he (the
judge) begged the question of crime being committed
(Hear, from Mr. F. O'Connor), and then punished them
on the supposition of their coming within the power
of the law. He (Mr. Harvey) hoped that the
subject would be brought under consideration of that house,
with a view of mitigating the extreme severity of the sen-
tence. The hon. member continued to vindicate the
formation of trades' unions, and read some resolutions
entered into by them, to prove the moral and peaceable
manner in which they intended to protect their only pro-
perty, their labour. He admitted that they were not
adopting the best mode of gaining their ends, but
all legislation was 'a matter of speculation, and was
improved by time and experience.
,( Hear, hear. )
ministersT e hoi
was member
present
regrettedt
ogive
some that none
as sur a
no h
cf e
that i s Ala
leniency
j e s t y's
would be extended to those men ; it was very little use for
the head of the government, who sat in another place, to be
vaunting of his friendly feeling towards the labouring
classes, while those poor men were sent precipitately from
the country, lest any humane interposition should rescue
them from banishment.

Mr. WASON contended that those men were legally
convicted, and not punished beyond the due rigour of
the law.

Mr. PEASE complained that he could not get an
opportunity of presenting some petitions, because of too
much protracted discussion on the subject of the Dorset-
shire men.

Mr. F. O'CONNOR congratulated himself that hon.
members were coming round to his opinion, that those
men were illegally convicted.
Mr. HALCOMB defended the construction which had
been put upon the act in the case of the Dorchester uni-
onists. The act did not refer merely to seditious offences,
but also to those offences which might tend to endanger
the public peace. He regretted that no member of his
Majesty's Government was present to defend their con-
duct on that occasion, which he (Mr. Holcomb) thought
deserving of much praise.
Mr. E. S. RUTHVEN complained of the precipi-
tancy by which these men had been hurried out of the
country, more especially when subsequent discussion had
shown the gross injustice of the sentence. He contended
that unless the national establishments and the interest of
the national debt were reduced, it would be impossible to
do justice to the interests of the working classes.
ILord CHARLES RUSSELL presented a petition from
the farmers of Bedford, in favour of the Beer Act ; also
a petition from a congregation of dissenters in the same
county, praying for relief.
Lord MORPETH presented a petition, very numerously
and respectably signed, from the West Riding of the
county of York, against the General Registry Act.
After a few words from Sir S. WHALLEY, in favour
of a plan of general registration—
Sir G. STRICKLAND begged Ito bear his testimony
to the respectability of the petition presented by his noble
colleague. The sentimentsof the inhabitants of Yorkshire
generally were against the bill.
Mr. BLACKBURNE supported the petition, and ex-
pressed his determination to vote against the second read-
ing of the bill, as even were the measure a good one, it
should not be forced upon the people against their wishes.
Lord MORPETH presented a petition from the woollen
card makers of Halifax, complaining of the inconvenience
to which they are subjected by combination of their men.
(Lord M.) was against the revival of theheomt
manufacturers.
Sir S. WHALLEY said the manifesto of the trades'
ion law.
xuwtl
aahulii
havege
hhßt
yienr
the.s )
h saide
coatffilf
tehlnedot gaolsacuoknseitno
n 2 off
s ff. v
,w:ohe
urai
.sela
sd tom lead
back.ba
Hethosuhgoltdthbeered
on wase
to enough
protectug h of
the low,
interests but e hobofiuntgahhe t
master some-
thing
unions was monstrous. He was a standing commentary
of it. (The hon. gentleman here held up his watch,
e
ruilLcentssert:ia
afor2Ad.
builtwmhesnici
mention
he
He
0. excitedsn hweo ua great
to the introduction of foreign manufactures. He might
neaufuSasiecrtoufrGetdEhOeineßvPGi E STRICKLAND thought the whole
disproportion between the price
of food and the scale of wages.
Mr. BRIGGS supported the petitiOn.
Mr. BAINES agreed with the noble lord to a certain
extent, but was certain that if the combinations were re-
vived, they would not prevent these whims unaccompanied
by remedial measures.

The petition was then laid on the table.
After the presentation of some other petitions, the
SPEAKER left the chair.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SlR,—ln the police report of the Marylebone Office on
Saturday last, it is stated that a duel was prevented by a
warrant issued on my information, I having attended on
behalf of " the gentleman in Cumberland," who was
challenged. I beg leave to correct this statement, which
is a mistake. I attended wholly without that gentleman's
knowledge, and altogether on behalf of his mother, who
having learned from another quarter that such challenge
had been sent, obtained possession of the letter which con-
veyed it, without the knowledge of her son, and sent me
as her professional adviser immediately to town with such
letter, to prevent the consequences which might have
otherwise resulted. Her son was quite ignorant of what
was done or intended, until he received in Cumberland a
letter from me with the information.

. .
Your insertion of this letter in your next paper, will
much oblige, Sir, your very obedient servant,
CHARLES S. CLARKE.

Bristol, April 29, 1834