The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-23 00:00:00

IMPERI.

iIAMEN T.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(This DAY).
Then-SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The London and North-Western and other Railway
Companies (Working and Traffic Arrangements) Bill was
read a third time and passed, and the Norwich New Street
Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed.

PETITIONS.
Several petitions were presented praying for the rejection
of the Government measure of reform; in favour of the

principles embodied in the scheme of refOrm propounded by
Mr. Bright ; from Dissenting congregations praying for
the same privileges with reference to endowed schools as
members of the Church of England. _ -

CHURCH RATE ABOLITION BILL.
Sir J. TRELAWNY gave notice that he would move
the postponement of the further progress of the bill until
the 30th inst.

HIGH SHERIFFS' EXPENSES BILL.
Mr. D. GRIFFITH moved the second reading of the
bill. He said the object of the bill was to reduce the ex•
penses in connection with the office of sheriff, and was
founded on the bill of 1839, which was thrown out in the
House of Lords, owing to ono of those accidents that some-
times occur in the transit of bills through Parliament.
That bill proposed to discontinue javelin men, and the
change which took place in rural police, and other
alterations in the country, rendered the retention
of such a body quite unnecessary. (Hear, hear.) The
power possessed by a sheriff did not enable him to get
rid of the unnecessary expenses which his office imposed on
him. When the statute of Charles the Second was passed,
which imposed obligations on the sheriffs of counties, the
state ot the country was totally different to what it was at
present, and it was necessary at that time to adopt mea-
sures for the safety of the judges. The present system that
prevailed was most cumbrous and expensive, and a sheriff
did not know what his actual duties were. At present a
sheriff of a county was liable for very heavy expenses in-
curred by election proceedings; and a high sheriff of the
county of Kent had at the last election to pay £l5O for such
expenses, because a person of straw thought proper to con-
test the county. The hon. and learned member alluded
also to the disagreeable duties which the high-sheriff of a
county had to discharge in reference to persons convicted of
capital offences.
Mr. BOOTH seconded the motion.
Mr. SOTHERON-ESTCOURT said the bill would not
remedy the hardships which the hon. mover stated were
inflicted on high-sheriffs of counties, for it was simply a bill
to do away with the necessity of their supplying javelin
men to attend upon the judges. As the police could per-
form the duties of that body he had no objection to their
being substituted for them.
After a few words from Mr. S. CHILD and Col. FRENCH,
the motion was agreed to, and the bill was accordingly
read a second time.
EDINBURGH, &c., ANNUITY TAX BILL.
Mr. BLACK moved the second reading of this
Mr. CUMMING BRUCE moved, as an amendment,
that the bill be read a second time this day six months. He
regretted the measure should have been revived, as he con-
sidered it one of the most unblushing spoliation and rob-
bery that ever was compressed within the four corners of a
bill. The effect of the bill would be to disestablish the State
Church so far as Edinburgh was concerned. Although he
was not a member of the Established Church of Scotland,
he could bear testimony to the services that Church ren-
dered to the cause of education and Christianity. Oecu•
piers paid less in consequence of this tax, and therefore
it was as positive an act of injustice as could be proposed to
the consideration of Parliament. He did not stand there as
the advocate of the clergy of the Established Church of
Scotland, who were able to defend themselves. Taking an
average of the last 10 years, the sum to which the
clergy of Edinburgh were entitled to was £lO,OOO a-year, of
which they collected only about £9,500, which showed that
they were not very rapacious, and their average income did
not exceed £6OO a year, while if they received what they
were entitled to it would amount to £7OO a year. He was
strongly opposed to diminishing the number of ministers in
Edinburgh, which was only 18. He did not think that
£6OO a year was too much for these ministers to receive,
considering the expenses attendant in living in a city like
Edinburgh, and the demands that were made on their
charity. He thought that the greatest injuries would be
inflicted on religion in Scotland if they abolished the State
Church, towards which this measure was a first step.
Mr. BAXTER supported the bill, which he regarded as
entitled to the favourable consideration of the house. The
measure, which had been introduced on a former occasion,
was withdrawn because it had neither advocates nor friends,
but that was not the case with the present bill. This
bill was supported by the majority of the ratepayers
of Montrose and Edinburgh, and was opposed
only by the clergy of Edinburgh and a section of the laity,
who considered that if it became law it would have the
effect of doing away with the Established Church in Scot-
land, by depriving the clergy of Edinburgh of an adequate
provision. The bill would also be supported by the Irish
members, whom they had assisted to get rid of, ministers'
money. Ho denied there was any danger to be apprehended
to the maintenance of the State Church in Scotland, and
that any loss the clergy might sustain by the passing of
this bill would be compensated from other sources.
Mr. BLACKBURN said that without pretending to be
the exponent of the Government views on this question, he
felt constrained, as a Scotch member, to oppose the bill, to
the details of which he could not consistently consent.
Mr. HORSMAN supported the bill and appealed to the
house to affirm the principle. He had heard with great
pleasure that the Government proposed to introduce a bill
on the subject, but he thought notwithstanding that it
would be satisfactory if they consented to the course sug-
gested, and then the hon. mover would probably consent
not to proceed further with it until the Governmen mea-
sure was introduced.
Mr. STEWART said he believed her Majesty's Govern-
ment would deal with the question satisfactorily and he
would oppose the present bill.
The LORD ADVOCATE said that when so many
persons of superior talent and learning had taken
up the question on former occasions, ho felt some
timidity in attempting to deal with it. However,
occupying the position he did at present, he felt
it was impossible to avoid doing so, and accordingly he had
prepared a bill, which he had brought with him to London.
The principle of that bill had been approved by the Govern-
ment, and he would introduce it shortly. (Hear.) As this
bill required great consideration, he could not then state to
the house the principle but he would endeavour so to deal
with the matter that, if he did not satisfy the hon. member
for Edinburgh on the voluntary principle,
[LEFT SPEAKING.]

MARRIAGE LAW AMENDMENT BILL,

HOUSE OF LORDS, TUESDAY, MARCH 22.
DIVISION.

Moved., "That the bill be now read a second time." (The
Lord Wodehouse.) Objected to; and an amendment
moved, "To leave out now' and insert 'this day six
months." (The Viscount Dungannon.) On Question
" That now' stand part of the motion"—Content, 39;
Not. Content, 49.

MINORITY—CONTENT.
MARQUIS. BISHOPS. LORDS.
Westmeath Cork, &c. Mostyn
EARLS. Down, &c. Overstone
Airlie Ripon Saye and See
Albemarle LORDS. Somerhill (M. Clan
Clarendon Aveland ricarde)
Dude Belper Stanley of Alder.
Granville Calthorpe ley
Grey Camoys (Teller) Strafford (V. En
Ripon Dunfesmline field)
St. Germans Ebury Suffield
Somers Gage (V. Gage) Truro
VISCOUNTS. Glenelg Vivian
Lilford Keane • Wensleydale
Torrington Kingston (E. King-Wodehouse (Teller)
BISHOPS. ston) Wrottesley.
Carlisle Macaulay

MAJORITY—NOT CONTENT. •
ARCHBISHOP. EARLS. LORDS.
Canterbury Romney Berners
LORD. Rosalyn Boston
Chelmsford (Lord Shaftesbury Braybrooke
Chancellor) Shrewsbury and Brodrick (Viscount
DUKES. Talbot Middleton
Somerset Stradbroke Churston
MARQUISES. VISCOUNTS. Clifton (E Darnley)
Bath Dungannon (Teller) Colville of Culross
Salisbury Hardinge Congleton
EARLS. Strathallan Cranworth
Amherst BISHOPS. De L'lsle & Dudley
Bandon Exeter Dinevor
Beauchamp Hereford Feversham
Carnarvon Ossory, &c. Rayleigh
De La Warr Oxford - Redesdale (Teller) '
Derby Salisbury Saltersford (E Cour-
Effingham St. Asaph town)
Hardwicke St. David's Sondes

Tenterden
Wynford

Against. For.
Colchester „Lanesboroug,h
Lonsdale Southampton
Motiteagle Essex
De Tabley „Ellesmere
Munster Gardner
Warwick Sydney
Montrose Sef ton
Malmesbury Bea sborough