The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-27 00:00:00

THE MILITIA.

Earl DE GREY and RIPON laid on the table certain
returns relative to the militia.

CHURCH TEMPORALITIES ACT AMENDMENT

BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION BILL.

The Archbishop of YORK moved the second reading
of this bill, the object of the measure being in-
tended to amend the act of 1844, which re-
quired the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to pay pro-
per attention to distribution of tithes. The present
bill directed the commissioners to pay proper regard to the
local claims of property also. The most reverend prelate
said he did not anticipate much opposition to the passing
of the bill, as it was merely a supplemental measure to
await the issue of the bill now before the Commons.
If that bill passed that branch of the Legislature,
then it would not be proceeded with further, but
in the event of such not being the case, then the bill at
present before them could be sent down to the Commons.
The diocese of Durham, which he had formerly under his
control, looked wi,h very great interest on the measure,
as certain funds had been taken from that see, and expended
by the Commissioners out of the locality.

The Earl of CHICHESTER. said he could not
assent to the bill passing in its present form.
Parliament had deliberately s decided that the funds
of the Church which came into the hands of the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners should be expended gener-
ally all over the country, without any preference being given
to the places from whence the money came,
and the only thing that gave priority to
any particular district was the want of
spiritual assistance. The noble earl then referred to
the circumstances connected with the see of Durham, and
said although a part of the funds of the Commissioners
was derived from mines, the greater portion of the money
was certainly not derived from that source. If the
present bill was to receive the sanction of Parliament it
would greatly interfere with the fair distribution of the
funds under the control of the ecclesiastical commissioners.
Earl GRANVILLE was understood to ask the most
rev, prelate to postpone the bill for the present.
Earl GREY said for three years the see of Durham
had been greatly interfered with in consequence of
many charitable contributions being withheld. He trusted
the most rev. prelate would not postpone his bill without the
Government gave a promise to proceed with the bill, in the
°Tent of the measure now before the Commons being re-
jected.
Lord PORTMAN opposed the bill.

Lord RAVENSWORTH said as the noble lord the Pre-
sident of the Council had given no sign of acquiescence
in the suggestion of the noble earl (Grey), he was not dis-
posed to adopt that course.
The bill was then read a second time.
THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS AND REGIS-
TRIES (IRELAND) BILL.

On the question that the bill be read a third time,
The Earl of CARNARVON urged that the bill should
bo postponed for a few days, and wished to be informed if
the measure had the support of her Majesty's Govern-
ment.

Earl GRANVILLE said that the bill was similar to
that which had received the support of the Government, of
which the noble lord was a member. The noble lord was
quite out of court in asking such a question. One or two
important amendments suggested by Earl Powis and the
Bishop of London were adopted by the Government.
The Bishop of OXFORD objected to the clauses of the
bill, which entirely altered the constitution of the ultimate
court of appeal, with regard to the doctrines of the United
Church.

The Bishop of LONDON said that his right reverend
brpther (the Bishop of Oxford) never meant to draw any
distinction between the two ChurcLes of England and Ire-
land.

Lord CRAN WORTH defended the bill, and said there
was nothing in it to create alarm to the right rev. bench.
It would not give to the archbishops and bishops of the
Church of Ireland any power or jurisdiction in this coun-
t; y.

The Earl of BANDON could not understand this dis-
play of hostility by the right rev. bench to a measure
which produced uniformity in the practices of the Church
of Ireland and the Church of England.
The clause was agreed to, and the bill passed.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.)

The SPEAKER took the chair at a quarter-past 12 o'clock

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The North British, Peebles, and Jedburgh Railway Com-
pany's Bill was considered and agreed to, and ordered for
third reading.

PETITIONS.

Several petitions were presented against the Highways
Bill and the Sunday Trading Bill, and praying the house
to vindicate their privileges in reference to the recent alleged
aggression of the House of Lords, &c.

TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND
(IRELAND) BILL.

The house went into committee on this bill, resuming at
clause 21, which was agreed to.
. On clause 22,
Mr. BUTT drew attention to some ambiguity in the bill
with reference to encumbrances.

Mr. DEASY, in reply to Mr. BUTT and Mr. LONG•
FIELD, said, it was not intended by the bill to give any
charges precedence over incumbrances, as it was consi-
dered such a course would alarm incumbrances and operate
injuriously, _

Mr. GEORGE moved the following amendment :—" At
the end insert 4 the owner of land charged with such an-
nuity shall (unless there be an express agreement between
him and the party advancing the monies on the security to
the contrary), be at liberty, at any time before the oxpira-
'tion of 25 years after the commencement thereof, to redeem
such annuity on payment of the arrears (if any) thereof,
and of such sum as shall be equal to the aggregate amount
of the half-yearly payments not then accrued due, after
deducting or allowing discount after the rate of 5 per cent.
in respect of such several future payments; and the judges of
the Landed Estates Court (Ireland) or one of them shall cause
tables to be framed showing the rate at which the annuity
is to be redeemed in the several years during which the said
annuity is made redeemable, and the owner of land so re-
deeming said annuity may charge the land on which said
annuity was'charged with the said sum so paid by him for
redemption of said annuity, with lawful interest thereon,
but so nevertheless that the charge upon such lands shall
be lessened in every successive year, to be computed from
the date of the order charging said annuity, by the amount
of one twenty-fifth part of the whole value of the said an-
nuity, and the interest in respect thereof.' "
Mr. DEASY suggested that the amendment should be
moved as an additional clause.

Mr. GEORGE assented to the suggestion, and withdrew
the amendment for the present.
Clauses 23 and 24 were agreed to.
On clause 25,

Mr. GEORGE moved an amendment, the object of
which was to afford limited owners increased facilities in
the leasing and improving of their land, subject to certain
restrictions.

Mr. DEASY opposed the amendment, as being too
complicated to be practicable, and conferring a power on
the limited owner which might be exorcised to the prejudice
of the future owner.
Mr. LONGFIELD considered that the amendment,
though it contained some good points, would not work
satisfactorily ; and did not impose sufficient restriction on
the limited owner.

Lord FERMOY opposed the amendment and availed
himself of the opportunity of expressing his disapprobation
of the course adopted by the committee on the last day the
bill was discussed, namely, transferring the power of de-
ciding on the title to land by the chairman of quarter sessions
to the more dilatory and expensive tribunal of a law court.
He concluded a chief cause of the want of fertility of the
land and the discontent of the peasantry was the practice of
landlords in Ireland refusing to grant leases to their tenants.
Lord NAAS considered the proposition of the hon. mem-
ber (Mr. George) calculated to work beneficially. By the
bill as it stood at present a preliminary investigation was
required before the chairman of the quarter session, to
enable a limited owner to grant a lease, the effect of which
would be to increase litigation without any corresponding
advantage.
Colonel FRENCH contended that the preliminary in.
vestigation in question was necessary.
Mr. MAGUIRE approved of the preliminary investiga-
tion, It was better to give a tenant the strongest guarantee