The Sun.
London, England, 1866-06-12 00:00:00

THE LECTIONARY OF THE CHURCH.

Lord EBITRY moved that an humble address be pre-
sented to her Majesty for the appointment of a commission
to revise the lectionary of the Established Church, and
also to consider what steps should be taken to obviate the
evils complained of arising from the compulsory and almost
indiscriminate use of the burial service.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURYresisted the motion'
not because he was opposed to reform in the Church, for
he had supported many reforms, but because he doubted
whether any real good would follow the appointment of a
Commission. With respect to Liturgical revision there
was much diversity of opinion, but the balance of petitions
to Parliament had been greatly against such a course. The
language of the Burial Service did in some cases occasion
difficulty, but he thought that by the exercise of charity
and discretion clergymen could conscientiously obey the
present law.
Lord COLCHESTER supported the motion, chiefly
upon the ground that any inquiry must take a wider range
than the two questions now specified, and that such
changes might be made as would conciliate and bring
within the Church many who felt that at present thoy
could not 'adopt her formularies.
The Bishop of LONDON could not support the motion,
as, even admitting, the grievances complained of, the pre-
sent was not the proper time to remedy them. 'lle vindi-
cated the Church of England from servile adherence to old

forms.
Lord RUSSELL did not think it advisable that the
Crown should interfere in the manner proposed, as in tho
divided state of opinions tho result of a Commission would
certainly be to provoke angry controversies, and was not
certain to effect much good.
After a few words from Lord REDESDALE, and from Lord
EMMY in reply,
The House divided, and rejected the motion by 66 to 40.
The Charitable Trusts and Deeds Enrolment Bill was
read a second time.
Other bills were advanced a stage, and their lordships
adjourned at 20 minutes past seven o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-LAST EVENING.
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.

NEW MEMBER.
Mr. ESMONDE took the oaths and his seat for Water.
ford.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
—Glasgow Bridges ; Glasgow Corporation Water ; Middles-
brough Extension and Improvement ; Montrose Harbour ;
and Perran Railway, Pier, and Harbour.
EXTRADITION OF CRIMINALS.

Mr. HUNT moved for a return of list of crimes forming
the subject of extradition enumerated in treaties between
Great Britain and foreign countries which aro in opera-
tion, showing the date of treaty.—Agreed to.
ECCLESIASTICAL ESTABLISHMENTS (WEST
INDIES).

Mr. MILLS moved for a return of the names, officers,
And salaries, respectively, of the parsons who participate
in the payments out of the Consolidated Fund in respect
of the ecclesiastical establishment in the West Indiesovith
any additional sum paid to any of them out of the Colo-
nial revenue, and for what service.—Agreed to.
EAST INDIA TELEGRAPH.

Mr. CHEETHAM moved for a copy of a letter from
Capt. If. Spryo to the Secretary of State for India, dated
Jan. 15, 1866, and of the maps attached thereto, referring
to commerce with the Shan States and west of China from
Eangoon, and extension of the Indo-European Telegraph
by land from Pegu to Ilong Kong and the Chinese open
ports. Ordered.

NE W
Col. TAYLOR moved that a new writ be issued for the
election of a member for Nottinghamshire, in the room of
Lord Stanhope, called to the House of Peers.

The writ was ordered. •
STRAND UNION.
Mr. J. SIMEON asked the President of the Poor Law
Board whether the inquiry into the treatment of the sick
poor in the Strand Union Workhouse was completed ; and
whether he would lay a copy of the evidence and the re-
port founded thereupon upon the table of the house ?
Viscount ENFIELD said the inquiry had taken place,
and ho hoped to be able to lay the report on the table with
the least possible delay.
AUSTRIA, PRUSSIA, AND ITALY.

Mr. KINGLAKE said he was anxious to ask a question
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and it was, if possible,
to elicit the advice which her Majesty's Government had
given to some of the disputing States. He had reason to
fear that the peace of Europe had been broken at that
moment, especially as the Austrian commander had deter-
mined to convoke the estates of Holstein, and the Prussian
commander had determined to prevent it, and under these
circumstances he thought the house of Commons should
have an opportunity of expressing its opinion. Tho great

difficulty appeared to him to be Venetia, and Italy was
placed in a peculiar position, because in consequence of her
relations with France she was enabled to threaten a greater
power than herself, and therefore Italy was acting as a dis-
turbing State with impunity. Italy had had no quarrel with
Austria; but her object appeared to be to wait until Austria
was involved with another power before she made her
move. That moment had now arrived, and it was
said that Italy, to enable her to gain her ends, had
entered into a treaty offensive and defensive with
Prussia, and she was thus enabled to take her
part in the dispute. He could not believe that her Majesty's
Government had given any direct advice to either of the
parties which might lead to a disturbance of the peace, yet
rumour, with her busy tongue, had asserted that her Ma-
jesty's Government had advised Austria to give up
Venetia, and, if such advice had been given,
nothing, in his opinion, was mote
calculated
to bring about a terrible war. True it, was
that the advice of the English Government had not been
taken, and he, for one, thought it most unlikely that it
ever would be taken, but he contended that if they had
given it, it was a matter which tended to involve matters in
greater difficulty than any other matter that could arise.
If the proposal to Austria had been made to give up such
a vast province, then he thought it extravagant.
It was extravagant in principle, because she had
been asked to give it up on a principle, which for the
want of a better word, he must call a Fenian—(hear, hear)
—principle, because she was advised to give it up on the
ground of nationality. With respect to the Conference,
Austria said before she could consent to go into con-
ference she must know there was no attempt on the
Part of any of the Powers to aggrandise their estates, and
the proposal therefore at once collapsed. The Government
of France was first of the opinion that a Conference on
ouch terms would be useless, and the English Government
agreed with them. Re was certain that the maintenance
of peace was inconsistent with a change of territory, and
therefore he concluded by asking whether the Govern-.
rant were in a position to communicate any further infor-
mation with respect to the failure of the Conference at
Faris.

gßiatEleQn R
The CHANCELLOR of the EX UE
said he
did not contemplate that tho h„,
his question would travel over so Wide
eta.fineildn asking
he could not enter into a full explanation at the: because
conjuncture of affairs, and because he could not present
good purpose could arise by a debate on the subject talV,
place. The hon. gentleman said the Gorman quarreli
would have been arranged had t not been for Italy
but that was not so, at least as far as the information'
in the possession of the Government. allowed them to
form an opinion.. The question of the Duchies, just as
much as Venetia, formed the ground for quarrel, and the
convocation of the States of Holstein was the subject which
would lead to war, and not Venetia. There were, how-
ever, othor questions involved. The honourable gentle-
man said that Italy was a disturbing Power, and
that that was brought about by the protection sho
received from France. It was not his duty to defend
the Government of France; that was beyond his
province, but not stopping there the hon. gentleman had
said that it was rumoured that her Majesty's Government
had given encouragement to Italy, and advice to Aus-
tria. He had, however, acquitted them of giving
advice ; he might have done more and acquitted them
of giving encouragement to Italy. The hon. gentleman
bad said the Government had expressed its opinion that
Austria ought to give up Venetia. He did not know