The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-18 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 18, 1835

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JuLr 17.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at a Quarter before Four
o'Clock.

Mr. Lass, the new Member for Oldham, was introduced by
Mr. C. Ross and Lord COLE, and took the oaths and his scat.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brought up
ai Return from the Commissioners of the Kent Road Trust.
Mr. TOOKE obtained leave to bring in a Bill to improve
floe town of Truro.

Mr. W. DUNCOMBE presented a petition in favour of
the Redcar Harbour Bill.

Mr. YOUNG, on the part of his constituents, objected to
the imposition of passing toll upon shipping, which was pro-
vided for by one of the clauses in the Bill.

Major FIE A L-CL ERK said that hc---ICad been requested to
oppose the Bill passing containing that clause.
BERKHAMPSTEAD FREE SCHOOL.
Mr. THOS. DUNCOMBE had a petition to present from
the Rev. Thos. Dupre, Master of the Free Grammar School
of Great Berkhamstead, in the county cf Hertford, and Rector
.of the living of Willoughby, in Lincoln, in reference to a pe-
tition presented by the Noble Lord (Grimston). the Member
for Hertford, a short time since. The petitioner complained that
the petition presented by the Noble Lord had led to the most
-wicked and false attacks upon his character, and he ( Mr.
Duncombe) trusted that he would not be accused of party
motives in presenting a petition in refutation of those charges,
inasmuch as the politics of the rev, gentleman differed entirely
from his own. In his (Mr. D.'s) opinion, Mr. Dupre was
grossly slandered by the attacks made, and he was sure the Noble
Lord and the other Hon, Members who had taken part in the
discussion—and he was sure that portion of the press which
had joined in the attack upon Mr. Dupre—would thank him
( Mr. Duncoml)e) for setting them right.—( Hear, hear.)
As a specimen of the attacks that had been made
upon him in the press, he ( Mr. Duncombe) would take the
liberty of reading an article which appeared in an evening pa-
per (we believe, the Standard,) the day after the petition had
been presented. The Hon. Member here read the article. It
was stated in the petition presented by the Noble Lord, that
from the year 1811 to 1833, the Rev. Mr. Dupre was never
resident in Berkhampstead. Now the fact was, that he had not
been presented to the living of Willoughby till the year 1815,
and from 1805 to 1815 he had been constantly resident in Berk-
hanripstead, and had never visited Willoughby except' when any
of the four curates whom he had appointed to do duty there were
removed or promoted. The petition presented by the Noble
Lord had stated that Mr. Dupre and his usher were the sole
trustees, and that they had misapplied the funds of the charity.
Such was not the case. The Court of Chancery had the
sole management of the funds, and neither Mr. Dupre or the
usher had any control over them. The Commissioners of
Public Charities had visited the school, although it was
stated in the petition that they had not yet visited
the school, and no complaint was made against either the
master or any person connected with the charity. He had
been also charged with the violation of an agreement entered
into with a gentleman in the neighbourhood of Berkhampstead.
Such was not the fact. An agreement had been made, and
signed, and published in the newspapers, but the word " king-
dom" had been substituted for " the neighbourhood,"
and this there was a very great violation indeed of the
gentry; and not on the part of Mr. Dupre. The petitioner was
charged with not having educated any boys within a certain
time—that was not his fault, as no boys had been brought him.
It was stated that the master's salary amounted to 5,9931., but
that was a most unfair way of putting it, as that sum constituted
his salary for a period of twenty-one years, and he never
had received more than 2501. in any one year. He was
also charged with having put the Charity to the expense of
2,7721. for law; but in all those cases Mr. Dupre had been
the defendant, and in no case had he been called upon to pay
the costs of the other party. He would also state that there
were visitors appointed to the school, and it was their duty
to report any misconduct, if any had taken place.
The sole object of the petitioner in presenting that petition,
was to justify himself from the charges that had been brought
against him.
Mr. GOULBURN was sorry the Rev. Gentleman had
thought that he (Mr. G.) had utken a course adverse to him.
He could assure the House that no one would be better pleased
than him to find that the charges had been made without
foundation.

Mr. WARD said the charge against Mr. Dupre was, that
he had made this foundation a mere grammar-school, and had
thereby made it perfectly useless to the neighbourhood in
which it was placed. The Committee would be very anxious
to have the whole subject inquired into, and if it was found
that some Bill upon the subject should be introduced, he would
be most happy to give it his support.
Sir R. INGLIS said a few words which were inaudible
in the gallery.
Mr. R. A USTEN said the petitioners found no fault
with Mr. Dupre personally, but they complained that a cha-
rity of 16001. was rendered useless, from the manner in
which it was administered.
The Petition was laid on the table.

Mr. D UNC 0 MBE then presented a petition from Colonel
Bradley, complaining that justice had not been done him on a
former evening, when it was stated that his arrest was merely
formal. He had been treated with great cruelty upon the occa-
sion, which he verified by an affidavit.

DANISH CLAIMS.
Mr. HUTT presented a petition from Hull in favor of these
claims.

Mr. GOULBURN presented two petitions to the same
effect.

DRUNKENNESS.

Sir W. MOLE SWORTH presented a petition from a
parish in Cornwall against spirit drinking.
Mr. JACK SON presented a petition from Bandon against
the Irish Church Bill. Also one complaining of a man
having been sentenced to be transported for 14 years, for an
offence which he committed in a fit, to which he was subjected.
POOR LAWS.

Mr. PALMER presented a petition from ninety medical
gentlemen, complaining of the smallness of the remuneration
to medical gentlemen under the new Poor Law Act.
Mr. WALTER had been instructed to support this petition,
and he did so the more warmly from the conviction of the truth
of its statements.
Captain CURTEIS protested against the Commissioners
interfering with the guardians in regulating the salaries of
officers under this Act.
Mr. S. LEFEVRE having heard that it was the inten-
tion of the Hon. Gentleman to present this petition, had made
inquiries of the Poor Law Commissioners, and learned that
they had not taken any steps as those stated; they had left it
all to the Guardians of the several Unions.
The petition was then laid on the table.
ABERDEEN COLLEGES.
Captain GORDON presented a petition from old Aber-
deen against the union of the two Colleges, also a petition
from St. Martin's College in New Aberdeen against the
same..—( Hear, hear, hear.) They did not object to the
principle of the 13111, but to its details, which they considered
unreasonable and unjust. The Hon. and Gallant Member
presented another petition from several electors in Aberdeen-
shire, in favour of the Ballot.
DORCHESTER UNIONISTS.
Mr. H. MARSDEN presented a petition from Stockton-
on-Tees, in favour of the Dorchester Unionists.
IRISH CHURCH.
Captain WEMY SS presented a petition from Fife, in fa-
vour of the Irish Church Bill.---( Loud cheers.) Also a pe-
tition from the same place, against any grant to the Scotch
Church.

TAXES UPON KNOWLEDGE.
Mr. WALL ACE rose to present a petition from 1,667 of
the inhabitants of Greenock in favour of the taxes on know-
ledge being taken off. In doing so he would speak to a peti-
tion which he had presented from the labourers of the same
place, amounting to no less than 704. The present petition
was signed by the Magistrates, Town-Council, and several of
the most respectable inhabitants of the town, and the other wlikh
be had mentioned was signed by 700 of the labouring community.
In presenting these petitions he could not but call the at-
tention of the House to one urgent reason why there was
now a very good opportunity of taking off this obnoxious
tax. It had been stated to his great surprise, but much to
his satisfaction by no less than two wise men in the
other House of Parliament, that mail-coaches did not
cost the country anything.—( Loud laughter.) When
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, two years ago, was
upon the subject of taking the tax off newspapers, he had stated
that the mail-coaches, as they then existed, were not sufficient
to carry the loads they had to carry under the present system, and
the Noble Lord instanced the mails to Dover and Edinburgh,
but it had been declared by the present Post-Master-
General, and agreed to by other three of them, together
with another Noble Lord, that the mail coaches
travelled for nothing. That being so, in his opinion, the
time had arrived for pressing upon the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer this very necessary measure. On the other evening
he had forgot to mention a fact which was extremely impor-
tant. In a newspaper which was published in New York,
which he had in his possession, there were 1,331 advertisements.
That showed, it anything could show, to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, that if he would take off the tax upon News-
papers, he would receive from advertisements full and ample
remuneration. It was his firm belief that the acts of insub-
ordination that had taken place were to be attributed
to bad education. The time had now arrived when it
became incumbent to teach the people in politics as well as on
other subjects. There was no way in which the Ministers of
the Crown could more effectually convince the people of their
intentions to do them good than by declaring their willingness
to remove all taxes upon knowledge.—( Cheers.) He hoped
that when the budget was brought forward it would be seen
that the present Government were determined not to leave to
any other Government the credit of doing so great and so
excellent a good, The Hon. Member then brought up the
petition.

Mr. A. SANDFORD presented a similar petition from
Chard. The Hon. Member stated that the feeling in that part
of the country, even among the higher classes, was very gene-
ral in favour of the removal of this tax.
COLLIERS' WAGES.
Mr. WALLACE presented a petition from the colliers of
the county of Renfrew, praying that the House would interfere
for the purpose of altering the mode by which they were paid
their wages,

DISTRESS IN IRELAND.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented two petitions
from the inhabitants of parishes in the County of Mayo,
complaining of distress, and praying that the House would
introduce such a system of legislation as would relieve them.
He would at the earliest day move an address to his Majesty
praying for some relief to the parties mentioned.
Lord MORPETH would not then enter into a discussion at
that moment, as the Hon. Member had given notice of a motion
upon the subject. But he could not let that opportunity pus,

without assuring the Hon. Gentleman that, whatever the House
might do, the Government would do all in its power to relieve
the complaints.—( Cheers. )
Mr. H. G RATTAN said the great evil to be cured was, that
of the absenteeism of the great landlords.
Colonel PERCIVAL agreed with the Hon. Member that
absenteeism was the great curse of Ireland—(Cheers)--
but he was bound further to say, that until the coun-
try was brought into a state of tranquillity--until
agitation was put down, it was impossible for gentlemen to
settle in that country. The Hon. Member was perfectly
aware of the case of an English Gentleman who went from the
County of Norfolk to Ireland out of motives of philanthropy,
and settled in the county of Mayo, where he did great
good to his tenants and neighbours. In the year 1831,
when he thought proper to exercise his franchise by giving
a vote in favour of the liberal Marcus Somerville, and against
that influence which he (Col. P.) was sorry to wry had now
got so powerful as to command even the Government of the day,
the consequence was that he was persecuted and fired at—his
steward was murdered, and that merely because he wore the
cloak belonging to his master. It was absurd to suppose that
Gentlemen would go to settle in a country where they were
so traitorously and treacherously used.
Mr. ROBINSON said that not only were not the persons of
the landlords safe, but their property also was frequently in-
jured and destroyed.

Captain CUIiTE IS would ask the Hon. Member for Sligo
who agitated at Belfast a short time ago ?—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. GRATTAN said it was distinctly proved that the
steward was going to turn the man and his family out of the
house.

ney- General promised to consider, and the clause was post-
poned for that purpose.
On clause 02 being pi-bpi-310;
Mr. PARROTT wished to move an amendment. This
clause gave the Council of every borough to which a separate
Commission of the peace should be granted, power to grant
alehouse licences. The amendment which he wished to pro-
pose was to empower the Councils of horbughs tibt havitik
commission of the peace; tti gilnt licences to persons to keep
inns, ale.houset, and victualling-houses in the same way as the
Councils in the larger boroughs were empowered to do. He
also thought it would be necessary to introduce a clause spe-
cially to restrain the county magistrates from granting licences
in any of the boroughs. He therefore moved that the words
" to which a separate commission of the peace shall have been
granted" be omitted.
Mr. G ROTE suppnrttd the motion.
Lord J. RUSSELL, although he felt justified in proposing
that the power of granting alehouse licences, which had been
enjoyed by the county magistrates ever since the time of Ed-
ward VI., should be taken away in certain cases, yet he was
not prepared to do so in all cases. He was of opinion that in
the larger boroughs, those persons who would be chosen mem-
bers of the Council would be of sufficient weight and conside-
ration, and would have a sufficient degree of responsibility
imposed on them, to allow of their exercising the power of
granting licenses without the intervention of the magistrates ;
but he could not agree that the same argument held good
with respect to the members of the Council in the smaller
boroughs. He had endeavoured to carry the improved prin-
ciple as far as it was proper ; but he was not disposed to give
any great powers to the Councils of small and insignificant
towns. He thought it would be better to leave these towns
under the jurisdiction of the county magistrates. He, there-
fore, begged his Hon. Friend not to persist in the amend-
ment he had now proposed.
Mr. AG L lONB Y regretted that the Noble Lord should
oppose the amendment. In that part of the country with which
he was more particularly acquainted he knew that the licensing
system was the strongest political engine the magistrates pos-
sessed.—( Hear, hear.) It was well known the magistrates
were the mere nominees of the Lord Lieutenant, and that in
exercisinc, their power of granting licenses, they invariably fa-
voured their own partisans; and as they themselves were only
the nominees of the Lord Lieutenant, their partisans must ne-
cessarily be the partisans of the Lord Lieutenant himself.
Now, it was likewise very well known that the Lord Lieute-
nant of the county of Cumberland entertained political opi-
nions quite opposite to those entertained by the Noble Lord
the Secretary for the Home Department. He would, there-
fore, again entreat the Noble Lord not to strengthen the power
of his political opponents by resisting the present amendment.
Mr. DAWSON deprecated the principle of giving the
powei of licensing to the town council in any borough.
Mr. CHARLES BULLER was quite willing to admit
that the attack was a libel on the principle of the English law,
that the greater the truth the greater the libel. The Lord
Lieutenants jobbed in the appointment of the magistrates, and
the magistrates jobbed in the discharge of their duty. He
would prefer taking the power of licensing from the magis-
trates in all cases.

After a few words from Mr. CAYLEY and Col. SIBTIIOIIP,
Mr. G. F. YOUNG deprecated the attack on the magis-
tracy.
___

Mr. WARBURTON said it was matter of history on the
Reports of Committees of the House that the magistrates had
abused the power of licensing ; and in order that the public
might not be thrown prostrate before them, he should vote for
the amendment.

Mr. CHICHESTER defended the conduct of the magis-
trates, and contended that they were a body with whom no na-
tion could produce a parallel.—( Opposition cheers, answered
by ironical cheers from the other side of the House ) He
felt bound to oppose the amendment of the Hon. Member
for Totness.

Mr. EWA RT should decidedly vote for the amendment.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS defended the conduct of the ma-
gistracy, and opposed the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Totness.

Mr. PARROTT, in deference to the opinion of the House,
consented to withdraw his amendment.

The amendment was accordingly withdrawn, and the clause
was agreed to.

Clause 64.

Mr. HUGHES HUGHES proposed the insertion of a
proviso to add to the number of charitable trustees of every
borough, the recorder for the time being (if any) of such bo-
rough, and all persons acting under and by virtue of his Ma-
jesty's commission (if any) as justices of the peace, in and for
the same.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL opposed the amendment.
After a few words from Colonel Sibthorp, Mr. Maclean, and
Mr. Goulburn, the amendment was negatived without a divi.
sion, and the clause was agreed to.
The clauses up to the 75th were then agreed to.
Clause 76 was agreed to after some discussion.

Clauses 77 to 61 inclusive were then severally put and
agreed to, after a number of verbal amendments had been made
on them.

The clauses from 92 to 96 were then agreed to.
On clause 97 being moved,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was his intention to pro.
pose that the House should sit to-morrow to receive the Re-
port ; but as the House was now full, he need not say that,
if they could finish the discussion to-night it would be more
desirable.—( Hear, hear.) He therefore would ask permis-
sion of the House to receive the Report immediately.—( Hear,
hear)—and he should propose the third reading of the Bill on
Monday.(—Hear.)
The clauses from 97 to 126 were agreed to.
On clause 127 being moved,
Mr. MACLEAN moved that the following proviso be
added, having, he said, been requested to do so by his con-
stituents : " Provided always that in place and stead of the
present custom of the mayor of the city of Oxford, pre-
viously to entering upon his office, attended by sixty-two of
his burgesses, appearing before the Vice-Chancellor of the
University of Oxford, at the High Altar and St. Mary's
Church in the said city, and making oath to observe all the
customs and privileges of the said University, the mayor
shall, previously to entering upon his office, attend and take
such oath before the Vice-Chancellor at his residence, in like
manner as is now done by the Sheriff of Oxford." On more
than one occasion the University had been found disposed to
wave such of their privileges as were objectionable, when
their charter did not interfere. It did, on the present occa.
sion, and he hoped the difficulty would be got rid of.
Mr. ESTCOURT said the proviso appeared to him to
be inconsistent with the objeet of the Bill, and he should op.
pose it on that ground if on no other.
Mr. H. HUGHES supported the proviso.
Sir R. INGLIS thought it a proviso that ought to be
adopted.

'qr. WILKS should decidedly oppose a proviso of this
character.

Mr. MA CLE AN withdrew his amendment, and the
clause was agreed to.
Mr. HAWKE S moved an amendment in clause 128,
which enables the inhabitants of a town to petition the Privy
Council for a Corporation, to the effect that the petition
should not be granted unless supported by two-thirds of the
rated inhabitants of the said town. He alluded to a petition
which had formerly been presented from Dudley in favour of
the Bill, and said that he bad good reason for believing that
3,000 of the signatures to that petition had been written by
the same hand.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he, on the other
hand, had reason to belies. that the signatures to the petition
were good, and that it represented the feelings of the majority
of the inhabitants.

Mr. HAWKES said that the clause, as it now stood, would
inflict a great hardship upon many towns.
The amendment was negatived.

Clause 12, which had been postponed, being proposed,
Sir W. FOLLETT said that this clause, in its existing
shape, fixed the 25th October, in the present year, as the
period within which the list of persons entitled to certain
rights of property in the borough, must be made out'; and
declared that every person claiming such rights, should be
prevented from enjoying them, unless his name were placed
on the list. The Mayor was to be bound to make out the
list of his own authority, without reference to any notice
from the individuals concerned ; and the list, as so made
out, was to be conclusive, though not in their favour. In
some cases this might occasion great hardship ; in great trad-
ing towns persons might be absent—beyond seas, for instance
—and unable to have their names inserted. A seaman now
absent might not return until after the stated period, and he
would then find himself deprived of his right. Children
might also be made to suffer similarly, in consequence of being
unable to claim their privilege within the limited time; and
thus it would happen that a very great number of the poorer
classes would be subjected to a severe deprivation. He should
propose, first, to extend the time generally till the 25th Octo-
ber, 1836: then, to meet the case of those absent beyond seas,
he should propose that no one should be excluded who should
be out of the realm at the time of the passing of the Act, and
should continue absent until the 25th October, 1836, but that
such person should be admitted if he made his claim within six
months after his return ; and, thirdly, to provide for the case
of children, he should propose that in the event of a sufficient
reason being given to the mayor for the claim not having been
made before, he should be required to admit it. As to another
clause which the Noble Lord proposed for the purpose of
compelling freemen to sell their rights, that did appear to him
strongly objectionable.—( Hear.) It compelled a freeman
having rights of property to sell them to the corporation if the
council should think fit to purchase, and the money pro-
duced was to go into own pocket, and in no wise be applied
for the benefit of his children, to whom a portion of the rights
belonged.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, who spoke in a very low tone of
voice, was understood to say, that the period of the 25th of
October, 1835, had been fixed, because at that time the old
Corporations would cease to exist, and the new Councils
would come into being. To the general extension of the time
he was not disposed to assent ; but to some proviso, reserving
the rights of persons absent beyond seas, he should have no ob-
jection ; with respect to the other clause, compelling the sale
of freemen's rights of property, he did think that some such
power ought to be given to the new Council, with a view to
the general interest.

gr. LOWTHER. supported the proposition of the Hon.
and Learned Member for Exeter, for extending the time in
the case of persons beyond seas.
Mr. WARBURTON thought it necessary that at some
time a precise list should be obtained I and, therefore, that
some limitation should be fixed for the case of persons beyond
seas.
An amendment was then inserted as assented to by Lord
,John Russell.

Sir R. INGLIS moved a clause to the effect, that the Bill
should not come into operation in any borough (the snaking
up the roll of burgesses therein always excepted), until it,

should have been adopted by the absolute majority of the said
lititgetttt
Lord JOHN RUSSELL objected to the clause.
_ . .

Negatived without a division.
Sir R. INGLIS moved the following clause :—" That the
Town Council shall be styled the Court of the Mayor and
Council of btlt Jiord the 10,nr.,r Aft atki ,fett fhe berough of A,
and shall have the powers of a Court
After a few words from the ATTORNEY-GENERAL— -

The clause was negatived without a division ; as were also
the following clauses, which were also moved by Sir R. IN-
GLIS :—" That Members of the Town Council shall not be
removeable, except by the absolute majority of the burgesses
registered in the borough " That tounirlipal oaths shall be
takeh by ilie burgesses, and by the Mayor and Members of the
Town Council, and by the Recorder and Town-Clerk."
Mr. BRODIE moved the following clause:—" And be it
further enacted, that in no case where there is a trust now ex-
isting for charitable uses, in which it is required that every per-
son shall be disqualified to act in the trust if he shall become
a Member of a body corporate, shall any person, being such
trustee, be disqualified to act in the trust, in consequence of his
being elected a Member of the Town Council of any city or
borough under this Act."
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it appeared to him that to
agree to this clause would be to set aside one of the provisions
of this Bill.

The clause was negatived without a division.
Mr. R. WA SON moved the following clause:—" That all
laws relating to bribery and corruption at elections for Mem-
bers to serve in Parliament, be applied to all elections which
shall take place under this Act."
Lord J. RUSSELL did .not immediately see any objection
to the clause ; but, on the contrary, thought that at least
something like it ought to be adopted. He had not, however,
sufficiently consulted the Acts to which the clause referred;
and he therefore suggested to the Hon. Gentleman the ex-
pediency of withdrawing the clause, and submitting it again
on the third reading of the Bill.
After a few words from Mr. WYNN,
Mr. R. W A SON acquiesced in the Noble Lord's recom-
mendation, and withdrew the clause.
Sir JOHN YARDE BULLER moved the following
clause :—" And whereas certain bodies corporate are seised
or possessed of divers advowsons or, rights of presentation to
rectories, vicarages, and other ecclesiastical benefices, and
also of churches or chapels devoted to the purpose of religious
worship, according to the rites of the Established Church of
England. And whereas it is expedient that the exercise of
such right of presentation, and the direction, care, and super-
intendence of such churches and chapels, and of all the matters
and things relating thereto, be in the direction of, and exclu-
sively vested in, members of the Established Church of Eng-
land. Be it therefore enacted, that in every borough in which
the body corporate is seised or possessed of any advowson or
right of presentation to any rectory, vicarage, or other eccle-
siastical benefice, or is seised or possessed of any church or
chapel devoted to the purpose of religious worship, according
to the rites of the Established Church of England, the council
of such borough shall, on the Ist day of November, in this and
every succeeding year, nominate and appoint out of their own
body a committee for the management of the ecclesiastical
property and affairs of such body corporate, such committee to
be composed of persons being members of the Established
Church of England, and such committee exclusively shall ex-
ercise the right of presenting to every such rectory, vicarage,
and other ecclesiastical benefices, and shall also have the entire
and exclusive care, management, superintendence, direction,
and control of the said churches and chapels, and all matters,
proceedings, and regulations whatsoever connected therewith,
and over which the body corporate have now any power or
authority, and shall do, or cause to be done, at the costs,
charges, and expense of such body corporate, all acts and
things which the said committee may deem necessary or expe-
dient for the maintenance, keeping up, and support of such
churches and chapels, in the same manner and in all respects
as the same have been hitherto maintained, kept up, and sup-
ported by the body corporate to which the said churches and
chapels belong►."
Lord J. RUSSELL thought that such a clause would be
improperly introduced in such a Bill as the present; and that
it would be contradictory to existing enactments. He must
object to any clause, providing that a certain number of any
corporate body should be of a particular religious persuasion.
Mr. G 0 ULBURN supported the clause, and contended
that the existing laws, instead of being in opposition to it,
were in conformity with it. By the Bill, as it stood, and
without some clause such as that now proposed, Roman Ca-
tholics would have the power of exercising an authority which
they never before possessed. He contended that persons who
entertained opinions contrary to the doctrines of the Church of
England, ought not to have any share in the patronage of the
Church of England.
Lord HO WICK said, that the ecclesiastical patronage
which the Dissenters were enabled to enjoy under the Test
and Corporation Acts, was infinitely greater than the powers
conferred on them by the part of the present Bill, which was
now objected to. The clause proposed could have no other
effect than that of increasing the animosities and religious dif-
ferences existing amongst all persuasions.—('Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. Wthsts and Lord SANDON,
the clause was negatived without a- division.
Sir W. FOLLETT then moved the insertion of certain
clauses for the purpose of establishing Courts of Record in
the boroughs mentioned in the Schedule to the Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was opposed to estab-
lishing a defective system of local courts, such as he thought
those proposed would be. He expected soon to see such
courts founded on a proper and sound footing.
The clauses were then withdrawn.
Schedules A, B, C, D, and E, were then agreed to. The
House resumed, and the Report was received.
Lord J. RUSSELL then moved " That the Bill be read
a third time on Monday next."—(Loud cheering for some
minutes.)
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at two o'clock to Monday.

ROUSE OF LORDS, JULY 17.

At five o'clock Sir L. SHADIVELL:Vice-Chancellor, took
his seat on the Woolsack for the first time, under the Com-
mission appointing him Speaker of the House of Lords in the
absence of Lord Denman. The new Speaker was congratu-
lated by Lord Melbourne, Lord Lansdowne, and other Noble
Lords as they entered the House
Lord BROUGEIANI was occupied in giving judgment in the
case of " Browne v. Sinclair" till half-past five. Their Lord-
ships ordered that the case should be remitted to the Court of
Session in Scotland for further consideration.

Lord STAFFORD moved the second reading of the Ge-
neral Turnpike Act.
SCOTTISH COLLEGES.

The Earl of ABERDEEN presented a petition from
Marischal College, against a Bill before the other House, for
uniting the Colleges of Aberdeen. He coincided in the prayer
of the petition—be thought such a proposition should have
originated with his Majesty, and hoped the Bill would not be
presented in this Session.
Lord BROUGHAM thought there was nothing irregular
in receiving a petition against a Bill not regularly before their
Lordships.
Viscount MELBOURNE said a few words in favour of the
Bill, which the petitioners could not know the provisions of at
the time they presented the petition.
The Earl of ABERDEEN begged to know if any steps
would be taken by their Lerdships in consequence of the Re-
port of the Commissioners of Education relative to the Glas-
gow College ?
Viscount MELBOURNE could not give any definitive
answer to the question, but he could state that it was the in-
tention of his Majesty's Government to take all the recom-
mendations of the Commissioners into consideration.
ADMISSION OF LADIES.

Lord BROUGHAM, in alluding to a motion which had
been passed last night in another place, deprecated in very
strong terms the introduction of Ladies to the Houses of Lords
and Commons. There was no person more devoted to the fair
sex than himself, nor no person more desirous of seeing them
in their proper places—( Hear, and a laugh)—but if no other
Noble Lord did so, he (Lord Brougham) would feel it his duty
to move, that they be excluded from the House of Lords dur-
ing their Lordships' deliberations.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE had not seen any ar-
rangement in the Report of the Building Committee for the
accommodation of ladies, and could give no information on
the subject.
MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS.

Messengers from the House of Commons appeared at the
bar for the purpose of obtaining a copy of the Report of the
Committee appointed to provide necessary accommodation for
their Lordships.—Ordered.
Several private Bills to which the House of Commons had
agreed were also brought up.
DUTY ON TIMBER.

Lord ASHBURTON presented petitions from St. John's,
and other places in New Brunswick, against any alteration in
the duty on timber,
Lord AUCKLAND said it was not intended to propose any
alteration in the duties on timber in the present session.
Lord MONSON presented a petition in support of the
Irish Church, and against the appropriation clauses.
Lord FARNHAM supported the petition.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE,aithOuic opposed to Municipal
Reform, and although believing that the Secretary of State was
right in refusing the protest of Mr. Hogg as a Report,
wished to know if the Noble Viscount opposite bad any objec-
tion to state why it had been refused as a protest ? He was
quite willing to state that great reform was necessary in Mu-
nicipal Corporations ; and the only difference which existed
between him and the Noble Lords opposite was, as to the mode
in which that Reform was to be effected.—( Hear, hear.) Par-
liament had a perfect right, however, to require that all the
important evidence laid before the Commissioners should be
submitted to their jurisdiction, in order that they might deter-
mine whether the conclusions drawn from facts deposed, were
just and well founded. He must say that the protest which
had been some time since sent in by Sir F. Palgrave, had gone
far to substantiate the charge which had been brought against
the Commissioners, viz., that their Report was not drawn up
on fair grounds ; but, on the contrary, was marked by party
views, and a predetermination to view the subject in a certain
light which suited their own purpose. Mr. Hogg also, the
Commissioner to whose opinions he (Lord Wharncliffe) had
now called their Lordships' attention, had sent in a paper
in the shape of a protest, to the Secretary of the Home De-
partment, which would not be received by the Noble Lord in
that shape, but which contained this Commissioner's reasons
for refusing to accede to the Report which had been returned
by the oti:er Commissioners.--( Hear, hear.) He thought
it most desirable that their Lordships should be made ac-
quainted with the contents of this document; and he there-
fore wished to know whether the Noble Lord opposite had
any objection that the correspondence which bad taken place
between Mr, /Ogg and the Noble Lord, the Secretary of

State for the , Home Department, and also the oper which
Mr. Hogg sent in the shape of a protest, should be produced.

LottIMELOQURNE conceived that the Noble Lord had
fully answered his otivii fpegtion for he admitted that if each
member of a Commission were Suffereti to send in a separate
Report, there would be no end to such proceedings, and no
advantage could be derived from the appointment of a Com.
missiort to inquire into any subject.—( Hear, hear.) But then
the Noble Liikd had dad that if this paper of Mr. Hogg's were
not received as a report, it alight nevertheless be sanctioned
as a protest. Why, if it were not right that it shotild be re-
ceived as a report, it followed as a matter of course that it
ought not to be received as a protest, which was a mere change
of its name. . .

Lord WHAIINCLIFFE—Then why receive the protest
of Sir F. Palgrave
Lord MELBOURNE—That retest was erroneously re-
ceived at the time the measure on Corporate Reform was •in
course of preparation, and formed no ground for tlie reception
of the paper from Mr. Hogg. He apprehended, howetcr,
that no disposition whatever to stifle Mr. Hogg's Report would
be displayed; and he was sure, if the Noble Lord was anxious
to obtain the information contained in that Report, that the
gentleman from whom it proceeded would be most willing to
communicate it.—(Hear, and a laugh.) The Noble Lord
might, therefore, enjoy the full benefit of the Report, and in-
troduce it to the close and immediate attention of their Lord-
ships, by embodying it in his speech on the question of Mu-
nicipal Reform, when the Bill relating to that question was
brought up for discussion in that House,—( Hear, hear.)

Lord ABERDEEN said that nothing was more common
than for a member or members of a Commission to enter a
protest against the Report on which the majority of their bro-
ther Commissioners might have decided. This was done in
reference to a question which bad come under their Lordships'
notice that night—he alluded to the subject of the Scotch
Universities. Commissioners had been appointed to inquire
into the state of learning in those Universities, and some of
them had returned a Report, which was accompanied by a pro-
test from others. He was satisfied that the same course should
be pursued in the present case ; and lie was the more con-
vinced of the expediency and justice of having Mr. Hogg's
protest received, because he thought that Parliament would
have lost much valuable information on the question of which
it treated, if the protest of Sir F. Palgrave had not been made
and admitted.—( Cheers. )
Lord A SHBURTON said, that the only question in the
present case appeared to him to be whether Mr. Hogg was a fit
person to be placed on this commission ; and as it seemed to
be acknowledged that he was, his opinions were, he thought,
exactly those which it was necessary that their Lordships
should be made acquainted with.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord WH A RNCLIFFE observed that Mr. Hogg com-
plained that he had not been allowed a fair opportunity of
stating his opinions on the subject of Municipal Corporations.
Mr. Hogg had also said, that he sent in Reports with re-
spect to Liverpool and other places, which were not printed.
The Noble Lord had no objection, he presumed, to the pro-
duction of the correspondence, which had passed between
Mr. Hogg and the Secretary of State.
Lord MELBOURNE—None whatever.

Lord HARR° 11' B Y did not consider the Noble Lord the
Secretary of State for the Home Department justified in re-
jecting the protest of Mr. Hogg. He trusted that some
mode would be devised by which the important information
in the protest of Mr. Hogg should be laid before Parliament.
—( Hear, hear.)
Lord MELBOURNE did not think that it was attaching
any undue importance to a Report to have it decided upon by
a majority of Commissioners, as those only who assented to
it affixed their names to the document. This proceeding did
not, however, put Parliament in possession of the grounds on
which the assent of those who refused to sign the Report
was withheld. As it was far from his intention that any in-
formation which could be properly afforded should not be laid
before their Lordships, he should take care to see his Noble
Friend the Secretary of the Home Department on the sub-
ject, before Monday, and determine on what course to pursue
with a view of meeting the wishes expressed by some of their
Lordships.—( Hear, hear.)
The Bishop of EXETER recollected a remarkable prece-
dent for the adoption of the course proposed to be taken
with respect to Mr. Hogg's protest. It was the Report of
the Commissioners on National Education in Ireland, three
of whom decided on a Report which the two other members
of the Commission dissented from. To the Report, how-
ever, was subjoined the protest of the dissentients.—( Hear.)