The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-07 00:00:00

THE APPORTIONMENT OF SAVOY.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE postponed till the
13th inst. his motion for the production of further corre-
spondence with the French Government and the great
Powers relative to the apportionment of Savoy.
DISTURBANCES IN ST. GEORGE' S-IN-THE

EAST.

Viscount DUNGANNON called attention to the dis.

turbances which occurred in the parish church of St.
George's-in-the-East, especially to those which took place
on the 17th and 24th of June last. He hoped the Govern-
ment would state that they intended to take some decisive
steps to put down such a state of things. (Hear, hear.)
The Bishop of LONDON said that this was not a ques-
tion which ought to be trifled with, but one whichwas every
day becoming more and more important. From the infor-
mation which he (the Bishop of London) received weekly, he
believed the interruptions were not so bad as they had
been. But that improvement was owing entirely to the pre-
sence of the police. (Hear.) The riots would be as bad at
this moment as when the attention of their lordships was
first called to them, only for the presence of the police.
'What he wished to call the attention of the noble earl to
at present was, that so long as this house was sitting there
would be some check on the riotous violence of the people
who attended the church,but they were rapidly approaching
the time when the house would no longer be sitting, and
when it would no longer be possible to ask her Majesty's
Government a question on the subject ; and the noble earl
had to consider whether it would be possible to go on with
the present system of keeping down the disturbances by the
present system of police. (Hear, hear.) It was painful for
him (the Bishop of London) to have to speak of any church
in the metropolis, or anywhere else, in this way ; but he could
not avoid saying that there must be great fault somewhere
when a clergyman required the presence of a large body of
police in order that he might carry on the services in quiet-
ness. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of Gr. RANVILLE said he held in his hand re-
ports from the police superintendent and the police inspec-
tors on duty at St. George's-in-the-East, which showed
that the account of the disturbances from which the noble
viscount had drawn his information was not a correct one.

There were 73 policemen onduty in and outside the church
every Sunday. He did not know what more effective mea-
sures could be taken by the Government to prevent breaches
of the peace. However, the subject was one which would
receive consideration during the recess.
After a few words from Viscount DUNGANNON the
subject dropped.
CALEDONIAN AND CRINAN CANALS BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
NEW ZEALAND BILL.
This bill, as amended, passed through committee.
LOCAL BOARD OF HEALTH BILL.

The report of the amendments of this bill was agreed to.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at a quarter past twelve
o'clock.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Edinburgh Royal College of Surgeons Bill was read
a third time and passed.

PETITIONS.
Several petitions were presented against the religious
profession clause in the Censea Bill, against the Sunday
Trading Bill, against the extension of the Wine Licenses
Bill to Scotland 3ariag tlat, 1,v:41.z:a .:amen Parlinnient,
&c.

ANNUITY TAX ABOLITION (EDINBURGH)
BILL.
On the order of the day for going into committee on this
bill,

Mr. HADFIELD said that he would not press the
amendment which stood on the paper, the object of which
was to refer the bill to the examiners of petitions for
private bills, who should report to the house in reference to
the bill. He retained, however, the opinions he had pre-
viously expressed in reference to this measure. The bill
was recommitted on the 28th June, and in its altered form
was in the hands of members only a few days. The fact
was, that the bill was an entirely new bill ; and, although
he might have no locus standi to entitle him to move the
amendment, he considered' that the bill should not be pro-
ceeded with this session.
Mr. CAIRD presented a petition from the Town Council
of Edinburgh, against the bill in its altered form, and ap-
pealed to the Lord-Advocate not to press the bill.
The LORD-ADVOCATE said that some explanations
had now become necessary in consequence of a misunder-
standing on the part of hon. members. This bill was
changed in its form at the request of the Town Council who
now petitioned against it. He had introduced a bill in con •
formity with that of 1857, and which at the time was ap-
proved of by the Town Council, but they subsequently
altered their opinion, and in order to meet their views he
had proposed that there should be a permanent rate im-
posed. He could not consent to withdraw the bill under
the circumstanees.
After some discussion,
The LORD-ADVOCATE said, that in order to termi-

nate this discussion for the present, he would withdraw the
motion for the house going into committee on this bill, and
move that it should resolve into committee on the other
Scotch Bill on the paper.
Ultimately however, the house went into committee on
the bill.
Clause 7 was, after some discussion, agreed to.
Mr. DUNLOP moved the omission of clause 9.
The LO RD-ADVOCATE stated that there was nothing
introduced into the bill in regard to security that was
not indispensable.
Some discussion ensued, and the amendment was nega-
tived without a division.
The other clauses were agreed to.
Mr. STIRLING moved an additional clause, to transfer
the patronage from the Town Council of Edinburgh to the
Kirk Session, as in the case of Montrose. He based his
clause on a conviction that the Town Council of Edinburgh
would not exercise the patronage in the most judicious
manner.
The LORD ADVOCATE said that there was 7a
difference between the case of Montrose and Edinburgh,
as the town council of the former were willing to resign
their patronage to the Kirk Session, if the latter were not
so disposed. He denied there was any ground for imput-
ing mismanagement to the Town Council of Edinburgh,
and he could not assent to the clause.
Sir J. FERGUSON said he agreed to the abstract prin-
ciple of the amendment, but as it would endanger the pass-
ing of the bill he could not vote for it.
Mr. BLACKBURN strongly advocated the principle
of the amendment, and hoped that an opportunity of
adopting it would not be lost.
After some discussion the committee divided on the mo-
tion that the clause be read a second time—

._
Ayes
Noes
Majority —62

The clause was accordingly lost.
Mr. BUCHANAN moved the addition of a clause to the
effect, that the Town Council of Edinburgh should have
the power to sell the patronage.
The Lord Advocate supported the clause, and Mr. Black-
burn opposed it.
The clause was agreed to without a division, and was
added to the bill.
Mr. MILLER moved the addition of the following :
" The right of patronage or of the presentation of a person
to be minister of the church and parish of North Leith,
heretofore belonging to and exercised:by the haill inhabi-
tants' thereof, under the Statute 1606, c. 27, or by an
of
them, shall, from and after the passing of this Act, cease
to be in and belong to the said haill inhabitants,' and
the same is hereby transferred to and vested in the male
persons, being of full age, whose names shall appear on the
valuation roll in force for the time, as proprietors or oc-
cupiers of any lands and heritages situate within the said
Parish of North Leith, hereinafter termed heritors,'
the heritors and
and within two months after the passing,
male communicants shall meet on such day as shall be
named by the kirk session, of which meeting intimation
shall be made from the pulpit of the said church, and also
by advertisement in three or more newspapers published in
Edinburgh not less than eight days previous to such
meeting ; and it shall be the duty of the session clerk
to cause the necessary intimations to be given, and at the
meeting no to be called the said inheritors and male COW