The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-30 00:00:00

PROCLAMATION OF DON CARLOS.

Captain BOLDE RO begged to ask whether his Majesty's
Government had received any information of the shooting of 3
seamen by order of Don Carlos, in virtue of his decree of the
28th of August. He wished to know whether these men were
armed or unarmed ? It was important that the fact should be
known because different opinions existed as to whether the
convention of Lord Eliot was extended to foreigners, and if
so whether his Majesty's Government considered the procla-
mation of Don Carlos was legal or not.
Lord PAL 111 ER STON said the only information his Ma-
jesty's Government had received was a letter from the officer
commanding the Ringdove. The letter stated that three Eng-
lish seamen belonging to the steamer Reyna d'Espagnola,
who were stranded near Bilboa, were taken prisoners,
and one of them, who made the greatest resistance,
was instantly shot. The other two were taken to a village
called San Miguel, about a league and a half up the country,
and were immediately shot.—( Hear.) The letter further
stated that this had been done in consequence of the procla-
mation of Don Carlos, that the life of no foreigner taken
in arms should be spared. This was the only information
his Majesty's Government had received on the subject. These
unfortunate men were not Marines in the King's service. They
were persons engaged in this country to act as Marine:.
in the service of the Queen of Spain. That steam-vessel had
acted in defence of the town of Bilboa, and three men who
formed part of her crew were surprised, having strolled out
of the town.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord MAHON rose, and exclaimed with great vehemence,
" Here then, Sir, is one of the first fruits."—(The Noble
Lord was here interrupted by loud cries of " Order" from
all sides of the House.) He understood the Order of
the Day had been moved, but if the House did not choose to
hoar him he would not interfere.
IRISH CHURCH BILL.

Lord MORPETH moved the Order for going into Com-
mittee upon the Irish Church Bill.
Mr. GOULBOITIIN and Mr. BARReN presented petitions
upon the subject, but from the noise in the House it was im-
possible to catch the names of the places.
The SPEAtiER having left the Chair, Mr. BERNAL sat as
Chairman of the Committee.
Mr. GOU ',BURN wished to know on what Bill they were
in Committee ?—(Laugl,,er.)
Lord AlO RPET H said on the Irish Church Bill.
Clauses 58, 59, 60, 61, and ~42 were agreed to without
comment.

On clause 63 beim; put,
Mr. HUME wished to know how the Clergy were ob.
paid in the reduced parishes—whether they were to be paid to.
the number of Protestants above 50, or in what way ?

Lord MORPETH said they were to be paid according to
the services performed. Clauses from 64 to 83 inclusive were
then agreed to without comment.
On clause 84 being put,
Mr. S. O'BRIEN suggested that the annual Report should
be made to that House instead of to the Lord-Lieutenant.

The amendment was agreed to, and the clause, together
with the clauses to 90 inclusive, were ordered to stand part of
the Bill.

--- Clauses 90 to 100 were agreed to.
On clause 101 being proposed, some conversation was car-
ried on in a low tone
,between Messrs. Roche, Shaw, and
Walker.

Mr. SHAW asked some question of. the latter gentleman,
which we believe was, how he described himself in the return to
the Commissioners of Public Instruction?—upon which
Dr. LUSHINGTON rose and said it is utttcrly an
unparliamentary question, and contrary to every principle of
justice—this is the first time in my Parliamentary career,
that I ever heard one Parliamentary Member rise up in his
place, and take upon himself to question the religious tenets of
another, and require him to statti to the House whether he
entertained one religious opinion or another ?—( Loud cries of
" Hear, bear.") I tell the Right lion. gentleman that
this House will not endure such inquisitoriai practices—
( Cheers), and I tell him further, that the Hon. Membei* whom
he thus addresses will best discharge his duty to this House and
to the public, by treating his inquiry with that contempt which
it deserves.----( Loud cheers.)
Mr. SHAW did not inquire into the religious belief of
the Hon. Member opposite ; he believed him to be a member
of the Established Church, and to have received the sacrament
shortly before the Return was made. What lie had asked was '
how he had returned himself to the Commissioners? The Hon.
and Learned Member who had spoken last had requested
the Hon. Member to treat his question with contempt--that
was just the way he should treat his lecture.—( Great cheering.)
Mr. HUME wished to know whether in the words that he
had applied the other evening to all those who were favourable
to the Bill, he intended to include all the Members who sat on
that side of the House be had the honour to occupy.
Mr. SHAW observed that what he had stated the other
evening bad been most incorrectly sent forth to the
world.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He had not said that all
those who were opposed. to him were infidels—what he had
said was, that all that was infidel in religion would naturally
join the other party.—( Cheers.)
Mr. HUME would be glad to know who the Hon. Mem-
ber meant ? Did he allude to the Opposition in that House ?
Mr. SHAW--I said no such thing.
Mr. HUME—Whoever the Hon. Member meant, his ob-
servation was not very liberal or Christian-like.—( Hear.)
He wished the Hon. Member would be more explicit. He
( Mr. H.) was one of the movement party, and he should be
glad to know what infidel assistance he received.—(Cheers.)
The Hon. Member ought either to retract his observation or
substantiate it. If not he should retract it.—(No, and Hear.)
As a man of hOnour he Was bound to substantiate his words.—
(Cries of " Order," " Chair," and much confusion.)
The CH AIRMAN observed that it was extremely injtt-
dicious in Hon. Members to interrupt the business by pro-