The Sun.
London, England, 1832-04-03 00:00:00

CATHOLIC MARRIAGE BILL.

Mr. RulruvEN moved the second reading of this Bill.
Colonel PERCEVAL objected to the second reading of
the Bill, on the ground that, if passed, it would afford
Catholic priests the power of performing marriages with-
out publishing bans, or going through other us-ful forms.
Mr. M. O'FERRALL raid, that in accordance with
the provisions of the Council of Tren., the publication of
bans antecedent to marriage was attended to by the
Catholic clergy in Ireland.
Mr. CRAMPTON could not support the Bill in its
present shape, as it was calculated to encourage clan-
destine marriages.

Mr. M. O'CONNELL said that any security deemed
necessary on this point could be introduced iu a subse-
quent st,ige of the Bill.

After a few words from 3lr. S. RICE, the House di-
vided, when there appeared—
For the second reading
.kgainst-it
•S

Majority in favour of the ,econd reading 0
The Bill was then read a second time ; after which the
other Orders of the Day were disposed of, and the House
adjourned at Two o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS, APRIL 4.
A petition was presented by a NOBLE LORD, whose
name we could not learn, against the withdrawing of the
drawliack on malt distilled in Scotland.

Lord KENYON presen+,cl a petition from J. J. Sinck-
da!e iu tivour of Reform. He also considered that the
cholera was only a tub thrown out to the whale in order to
stop the pi ocre2.4 of that great measure.
The Marquis of Suco and the Earl of RADNOR pre-
sented petitions against tithes in Ireland.
1:.:411 BATHURST gave notice, that to rnwrotv in -the
ab no,. of he Noble- Chancellor of the tioiversity. of Ox-
ford, he would present a petition against the Reform Bill,
agreed to at a Convocation of that Uniteisity.
Ihe Marquis of WESTJIE4TH gve hotiee, &at to-
niori-owihe.would inpvelirt tgigts 'of an 'addr,ee painted

0 the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland by the 'Magistrates of
W. stmeath, and the answer thereto.

Lord PLUNKET presented a petition from Livereedge,
signed by fifteen hundred persons, in favour of • the new
system of education in Ireland. The Noble Lord had
rec,ived the petition, accompanied by a letter from a person
residing in that part of the country, who stated that
meetings had been got up.with great diligence against
the Governtnent-system, but that it was made entirely a
political question. The writer stated, that at un-
meeting a person asked the chairman what the
purport cf the petition to which they were called on
to agree, was, when the chairman talsvrered that it was a
most unreasonable question ; that the resolutions had been
before prepared, atri that the meeting bad nothing more to
do thanagrn to them.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a peti•
till] from a place in the county Duwn against the new
system of education.

- The Duke of WELLINGTON pres,nted a petition
from the Mayor and Corporation of Queenborough against
the Reform Bill.

Mr. BERNAL, and others kern the 6,mmon,, brought
up several privve Bilis.

Lord WYNFORb presented a petition from Sir Har-
court Leta, praying for eie repeal of the Catholic Relief
Bill, and agairoit Reform.

The Dike of LEINSTER prefcnted a petition from
a pariah in Ireland, praying for the abolition of tithes.

PLURALITIES BILL.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY moved the third
reading of the Pluralities Bill. •

Lord SUFFIELD ezid he bad been so discouraged
by the house rek (fling the propositions which he had
formerly made against this Bill, that he would trouble
their Lordships no further. He hoped that some other
Noble Lord would move amendmette to the Rill. Although
he should not take that Course himself, he could
not let the third reading pass without making same
remarks oh the subject.—( Hear, hear.) He was
amonrat the many who exceedingly regretted that the
niil should do so little when so much was to be done.
The Noble Earl at the bead of his Majesty's Government had
said, that in his opinion the Bill was calculated to
do good ; but notwithstanding his deference to the talents
and judgment of the Noble Earl in the present case,
he could not but adhere to his own opinions, which
were, that if the Pill did any good, it would not be of
that descriptiraa which the Noble Earl promised him-
self. As the Nolile Earl had treated the Bill of
the Right Reverend Prelate so fairly. he hoped
that the Prelate wotifil treat the Noble Earl's Reform
Bill with (loaf raVour, in which event, he (Lord Suf-
field) wisuld say that the Bill had really done good
beyond his calculation. He had looked into all
the provisions of the Bill, and since it had been before the
House, he had well informed himself on the subject. He
had asset tained the state of the Church in different p irts
of the kingdom; and although the Right Rev. Prelate had
expressed a suspicion that his correspondents were Church-
Jobbers, he could assure him, that not only were they of
the highest respectability, but one of them had like-
wise been the authority from whom the Right
Reverend Prelate had derived much of his in-
formation. He alluded to the Rev. Mr. Hill, of Sr.
John's, Cambridge, who hail proved that out of 11,164
parishes, only 5,000 possessed resident incumbents.—
The number 4,412 were legally resident ; 132 were
livrig it, the parishes, but net in parsonage-houses ; 176
were living nest- the pirislies, and 140 were exempt
on account of cathedral or collegiate offices. Of 7,164
of richer benefices, 3,611 had now resident clergymen ;
and in those cas-s it cold not be pretended that the death
of residents was occasioned by the poverty of the livings.
Last spring he had read an advertisetnent in a paper,
offering for sale a living, the incumbeLt of which was 68
years of age, and his income was 6501. The sea had made
encroachments on the land, and 0-Jima& ertisement added that
" the church had gone to sea, and there was no rectory-
house." This was the way in which church livings
were recommended to purchasers by an exemption from
all duties and from any necessity for residing on the spot.
The Bishop of DURHAM, after making some obser-
vations which were not audible in the gallery, proceeded
to call the attention of their Lordships to a letter which
hail been published in the Times, signed " Dunelmensis."
The Right Rev. Prelate read the letter, and remarked that
the revenue of the Bishop of St. David's was not, in the
first instance, so great by one-third as the sum stated ;
secondly, that the Bishop of Exeter had resigned a living
more valuable than the Prebendary; next, the Bishop of
Bristol had given up a living, on assuming his place,
much more valuable than that he received. He also stated
that Dean Wellesley held only two of the benefices stated,
the duties of which he was well able to perform ; and,
finally, he proved that Archdeacon Thorpe held only two
of the offices attributed to him, with any emoluutrnt—
that of Atchdeacon and Prebendary of Diarbain. As Prime
Warden of the University he received nothing. Tile Right
Rev. Prelate then pronounced a high panegyric upon
Archdeacon 'Thorpe, and said it was too bad that such a
man should be held up to the world in an infamous and
audacious publication.
Lord KING said, that as they were promised a valua-
tion of church property, there teas reason to hope that
they might have a full opportunity of judging of the reve-
nues of the See of Durham. With respect to the Bill, lie
thought the Rev. Prelates had made it for themselves; at
least they had the whale benefit of it. There was a spe-
cious appearance of liberality, and a desire to concede to
the piibile wish; but their own patronage was untouched.
The Bill, he thought, smelt of Jesuitry. It did not pre-
vent the union of populous parishes, nor d d it take their
value into account. In fact, it only showed how little
ti-e Bishops were inclined to do. Whenever there was a
question of the anxiety upon the part of the Hierarchy
and the Government, for Church improvement, his an-
swer was, " Derry, Derry, Derry !" When that over-
gross n See became vacant, it was in their power to have
introduced a Reform, and yet they hesitated to do so,
When the Bill went into the other House, he anticipated
for it a reception tar different from that which it hail here
experienced; and he believed it would be returned to the
Right Rev. Bench in such sort, that they would not lie
able to recognize their own child. He rejoiced in this an-
ticipation, and now raised his voice against the third read-
ing of the Bill.

The Bishop of BRISTOL was ;anxious to give up the
living in question, and was only restrained frotn so doing
hy the consideration, that the revenues of the see wows
be reduced too much. The fact was, the curate of this
living was better if than the Bishop. He was to be paid
2501. per annum, together with rent, taxes, and so forth;
for there was no glebe-house, Lind the parish was, in all
respect., badly circumstanced, and returned no more than
7001. a year.
Earl GREY regretted alike the suhstance of the obser-
vations male by the Noble Baron, and ti(e tone in which
they had been uttered. When the Right Rev. Prelates
showed a disposition to meet the wishes of the puhlic, and
introduced a Bill (which had originated, as he thought all
such Bills ought to Originate. with the Heads of the
Church) for the purpose of refUrming c rtain of the abuses
in Church gover-ment, it was too had to attribute to the
Right Rev. Bench any improper motives.—(Cheers.) The
only objection which could be raised to the. Bill was, that
it (lid not go far enough; but this was, inde(d, a bad
ground of opposition to the measure. If be (Lord Grey)
thought this 13,11 was, as the Noble Barn had most un-
justly and most unfairly stated it to be, a mere insincere
device upon the part of the Right Rev. Bench to do as
little as they could do, he would not support the Bill with
that warmth with wnich he had hitherto supported it,
and would continue to support on the present occasion.
But seeing the sincere desire on the part of the heads of
the Church to reform abuses, and regarding this Bill as
a considerable step towai de retormation, he had given, and
would give the mea•ure his most strenuous support. .With
respect to an Ecclesiastical Commission, the idea, he
could state, was not a new one; it had been communicated
to him at his accession to the Councils of his Majesty, and
this Bill he regarded as the first step of inquiry with a
view to an improvement in the government and condition
~f the Church. Although the statement of the Right Rev.
Prelate (the Bishop of Durham) had not much to du with
the subject in discussion, he yet rejoiced that he had, by
making it, •refuted one of those shameful and scandalous
misreprest ntations which were now so frequently put
'orth.—(Hear, hear.) A. to Archdeacon Tnorpe, he
could add his testimony to all that had been stared by the
Right Rev. Prelate. He only held with emolument two
of the offices set forth—tie Archdeaconry and the Pre-
hendary—and the duties of these he discharged in the
most exemplary manner. lie hoped the House would be
induced to pass the Bill, and he trusted it would have the
effect of strengthening the hold which the Church of Eng-
land had, and deserved to have, upon the affections of the
people.

The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
The other Orders were then disposed of, mid their Lord-
ships adjourned.

People talk of the little encouragement to
dramatic authorship ; but Miss F. Kernble will not receive less
than 800/. for her play of Francis the First. She had 400/.
from Murray for the copyright, and she obtains from the the-
atre one.third of lOW. every night it is performed, so that P 2
nights will give her 40(1/. more ; it has „,!.lready been acted ten
times. It is only translations that are, and ought, to be, a
drug in the market; original productions will always obtain
their prio! if they deserve it,

FASHIONABLE INTELLIGENCE.