The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-25 00:00:00

cose he (Sir G. Grey) could say that the bishop devoted quent to the proclamation of the 19th claret ~Tanuary,
a considerable pra-tion of his income to charity purposes. 1552: of any correspordence that has taken place be-
Mr. CARDWELL said it was c,rtsinly the intention tween Meer Ali i'vloracl and the authorities in India, re-

of the Leg stature that the slim of 8,0001. shoulf; he the
14114, of the bishop's revtinw., and toe retiring allowance
ought to he calculated on that basis. (Hear.)
Mr. SPOONER said he had voted 6,0001. for the
Bishop of London, as that was the third part of his re-
venue: He was prepared to vote the allowance of the
Bishop of Durham on the same principle. It appeared
that the revenue of the Bishop of Burnam was 16,0001.
a-year. The question was not what Parliament had in-
tended, but what Parliament had enacted.
Mr. MOWBRAY confirmed this argument, and tes-
tified in favour of the bishop as to his munificence, espe•
cially in the establishment of the " Maltby Fund," and
giving 2,0001. a-year to the church purposes of his dio-
cese.
Mr. DUNCAN spoke in favour of the bishop, stating
that he augmented the incomes of the poorer clergy in
his diocese.
The committee divided—
For the larger sum
Against it
Majority
Mr. MO WBRAY desired to call the attention of the
eco'esiastical commissioners to the question of the aug-
mentation of smaller incomes. There were many cases iu
which poor cierqv were receiving additions to their in-
, come from the Bishop of Durham. Now, neither the sue
cessor nor the present bishop with their smaller incomes
would be able to keep up these payments ; and as the
common fund would be benefited by the arrangement in
progress, be suggested that these poorer clergy should
have their claims considered by the commissioners, and
have a " post charge" upon the fund.
Sir G. GREY said the bishop had made these grants
to the poorer clergy with the full knowledge that they
could only last during his life ; but if the commissioners
had the legal power, no doubt they would consider their
cases.
Mr. GLADSTONE said the bill had been assented to
in a great degree on the understanding that a certain
sum should go to the common fund. But now it appeared
that a large portion of this sum was to be deducted for
the benefit of clergymen who had enjoyed the private
charity of the bishop. If so, the measure had been passed
on false pretences or false representations.
Sir G. GREY repeated that the commissioners must
deal with the case according to the view of their legal

powers.
Mr. B.EA DLAM said he regretted that no ecclesias-
tical commissioner was present to make any definite pro-
mise as to the claims of those poor clergy who had been
referred to.
Mr. RIDLEY said a very small portion of the enor-
mous funds at the disposal of the commissioners was ap-
plied to the augmentation of small dioceses.
Mr. FOSTER supported those equitable claims upon
the common fund.
Sir G. GREY remarked that the report of the com-
missioners, which was about to be produced, entered
fully into this snbject.
Mr. CARDWELL, as one of the commissioners,
hoped that nothing that had passed in the present discus-
sion would be understood as committing them, and that
the house would reserve their opinion upon it until they
had read the report.
The clause was agreed to.
On clause 5,
Mr. ROEBUCK moved an amendment, the effect of
which was to make the new bishops subject to future
arrangements of Parliament.
Lord PALMERSTON said his right hon. friend (Sir
G. Grey) was going to give notice of a similar amend-
ment upon the third reading, and it would be better to
reserve any alteration until then.
The amendment was withdrawn.
Lord B. CECIL observed upon the words "any
canons to the contrary notwithstanding" what " canons,
related to contracts by bishops upon resignation ?
Lord PALMERSTON said the meaning was that the
bill should override any ecclesiastical law. (Laughter )
Lord R. CECIL did not desire to be informed that
this was the meaning of the clause, but what was the
ecclesiastical law in question. No doubt the noble lord
was profoundly ignorant of ecclesiastical law—(a laugh)
—but surely one of his law advisers ought to be able to
inform the house.
Mr. GLADSTONE objected to the words, as merely
•
unmeaning and unnecessary.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL said the meaning was
that the act should take effect, notwithstanding any ca-
nons to the contrary. (Laughter.)
Lord R. CECIL said he should move that the words
should be struck out as surplusage.
Lord PALMERSTON hoped this motion would not
be pressed. The words were words of form, and he
would consider this matter on the third reading. He
thought the words unnecessary.
The amendment was withdrawn, and the clauses
agreed to.
Upon the preamble,
Sir W:HEATHCOTE said it was objected to by his
right hon. friend (Mr. Henley), who would move an
amendment on the third reading, if it was not objected
to by the Government.
Sir G. GREY assented to this.
Mr. GLADSTONE suggested that notice should be
given of any seck important amendment.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL said the import of this
amendment would be to add certain words as to the sur-
render by the bishops of their sees.
Mr. ROEBUCK said that the preamble was not a
true preamble, stating, as it did, facts which had never
occurred.
The preamble was than agreed to, and,
On the question that the bill be reported,
Mr. GLADSTONE said he should oppose any amend
ment for striking out the words " duly and canonically."
The bill then passed through committee, and was or-
dered for third reading to-morrow (this day.)
METROPOLIS LOCAL MANAGEMENT ACT
AMENDMENT (No. 2) BILL.
On the motion for the consideration of the Lords'
amendments to this bill,
Mr. WILLIAMS pressed for the postponement of the
order, on the ground that an hon. friend of his had a
petition against the bill, and was not able to be present
to lay it before the house.
Sir B. HALL declined to accede to the suggestion.
Mr. BUTLER then moved the postponement of the
order, on the ground that the Lords' amendments had
only just come down to the house, and sufficient time
had not been afforded to consider them.
Sir B. HALL explained the nature of the Lords'
amendments, which had reference to the appointment of
parochial officers. The amendments declared that these
officers should be elected by select vestries under the
bill.

Mr. PELLATT complained that the Lords' amend-
ments would destroy the whole vitality of the bill.
Parishes now iu the enjoyment of open vestries would
not like the measure, and he should move the omission
of the Lords' amendments so far as they went to ex•
punge the first clause.
Mr. WILLIAMS said that the various parishes
looked with great jealousy upon the infringements of
their rights, as they would be affected by these amend-
ments. From time immemorial the parishioners had
elected their own officers, and he objected to delegate
the right to select vestries.
Sir W. CLAY thought the Lords' amendments left
much that was valuable in the bill. They also would
prevent litigation. After the passing of this bill, a
Courch rate could be made in open vestry, which he re-
garded as a great point in its favour.
After a few words from Mr. WILKINSON,
Mr. MAT IMO UGLI hoped the right hon. baronet who
bad charge of the bill would have the moral courage to
move that the L irds' amendinenu be not agreed to.
The first clause was the most valuable portion of the
bill.

The motion was withdrawn.
On the Lord.' amendments to the first clause being
read,
Mr. BUTLER moved that they be disagreed to.
The house divided—
For the Lords' amendments
Against it 8
Majority —4s
The Evidence on Foreign Suits Bill, and the Sheep,&c.,
Contagious Diseases' Prevention Bill, passed through
committee.
COURTS OF COMMON LAW (IRELAND) BILL.
The L oafs' amendments to this hill were agreed to.
NUISANCES' REMOVAL, &c. (SCOTLAND),
(No. 2) BILL.
The Lords'amendments to this bill were also agreed to.
HAY AND STRAW TRADE BILL,
The Lords' amendments to this bill were likewise
agreed to, a clause having bean proposed by Mr. WIL-
LIAMS for the prevention of fraud amongst dealers,
but withdrawn ou the representation of Mr. MASSEY
that it would impose very onerous duties on the police,
and be practically inoperative.
FORMATION, c c., OF PARISHES BILL.
Or, the motion for considering the Lords' amendments
to this hill,
The Marquis of BLANDFO RD moved that the amend-
ments should be agreed to. lie confessed he very much
regretted that the clause which permitted the application
of voluntary offerings towards the endowment of the
clergy had been rejected from the bill. He felt very
strongly on the subject of that clause ; nevertheless he
felt it might endanger the passing of the bill if be were
to insist upon its re-insertion. He should, therefore, con-
tent himself with expressing his complete adhesion to
the principle of the clause, and he hoped that on a future
occasion the subject would be taken up.
Mr. GLADSTONE was very glad to hear the obser-
vations of his noble friend. He confessed he felt they
were placed in a very unfortunate psition. The clause
had been inserted in the bill with the unanimous appro-
val of a select committee, and it had passed through the
house without II division. Mowever, it went up to the
House of Lords at the end of the session, and it was re-
j.icted by a majority of two peers in a house of only 40
members. Although the mrijority againstlthe clause was
no larger, he quite agreed with his noble friend,
thatias it was within three days of the end of the ses•
it would endanger the passing of the bill if'
they were to insist on its re-insertion. At the sam,
time, having regard to the unequivocal expression of
opinion in that house in favour of the principle of the
c.au:e, he trusted tent at a future time attention would
be ag tin attracted to the subject.
Tee amendments were then put and agreed to.'
THE SMOKE NUISANCE ABATEMENT (ME.
TROPOLIS) ACT (1853) AMENDMENT BILL.
The Lords' amendments in this bib were agreed to.
MEER ALI MORAD.
On the motion of Mr. I. BUTT the following returns
were ordered :—" Copies „1 any despatches addressed to
the Governor-General of India, in ret)ly to the despatch
of Lord Dalhousie, dated the 27th day; of February, 1851,
on the subject of the confiscation of the territories of the
Atneei' Ali Morad : of all correspondence that has passed
between his Highness Meer Ali Morad and the autho-
rities of India on the subject of that confiscation, sunse. •

lative to his intended visit to England :. of the•deposi-
tions or other information on the claims of Alt Morao,
recorded by Captain Pepe on the occasion of his visit to
IChyrpoor, in Auoist, 1843, as stated by Captain Pope
in his letter to F. Thomason, Esq., secretary to the go-
vernment of India, dated Sukkur, October 24, 1843, and
published in page 63 of parliamentary Papers, No. 73. of
session 1852: of all correspondence between the magis-
trate of Sukkur and the government of &uncle between
the years 1843 and 1845, or during the same period be-
tween the government of Schiele and that of India, re-
specting the withholding from.Meer Ali Morad of the
pengunnahs of Meerpoor, Mahtela, and Meherkee, and
of any correspondence between the same parties relative
to their restitution to him in 1845 : of the proclamat'on
iof Mr. Commissioner Freere, dated the 19th day t. f
January, 1852, confiscating the territories of the Ameer
Ali Morad : aid return of the several pengunnahs and
districts confiscated by this prodamation, and of the
gross revenue received by the Indian government from
each of those districts, in each of the years since the date
of the proclamation."
The house then alourned.

Couatiry aarices,-,