The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-10 00:00:00

CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.

The Marquis of BUTE presented a petition from Wigan,
in support of the Established Church of Scotland ; and a
petition from Kirkaldy, to the same effect. He would just
observe that the passage in his Majesty's gracious speech, re-
commending a grant for the support of Churches in Scot-
land, had given great satisfaction in every part of that country.
The Earl of R 0 SEBERRY said he could not hear the
observation of the Noble Marquis without taking some notice
of it. He (the Earl of R.) was a strong supporter of the
Established Church, and would allow that in several parts of
Scotland there was a deficiency of churches for the inhabitants
belonging to the establishment of that country. He could not
verify this opinion more strongly, that by stating that last
session he brought in a Bill for the purpose of increasing
the number of churches in Scotland by voluntary contribu-
tions. But when the Noble Marquis stated that the
passage in his Majesty's speech which he had read was received
with universal satisfaction, he, as one belonging to the Esta-
blished Church, and having received information on the sub-
ject, must dissent from the Noble Marquis's statement.
The Marquis of BUTE explained. He had said that the
passage was received with great satisfaction in every part of the
country.
The Earl of ROSEBERRY said that the Noble Mar-
quis's explanation completely proved the accuracy of
his (the Earl of Roseberry's) statement. It was tanta-
mount to stating that the passage that was read was
received with universal satisfaction, or general satisfaction.
He was persuaded that a very strong opinion prevailed in that
country (in which he did not agree) that the grant of
money for the object referred to, was a grant which
was hostile to the feelings of an immense proportion of
the people of that country. They were not averse to the exten-
sion of church accommodation by voluntary contributions, or the
appropriation of funds dedicated to ecclesiastical purposes, but
he was very much mistaken if they were not decidedly averse
to every public grant for the purpose. He was himself of
opinion that it would be beneficial for the country that such a
grant should be made.--( Hear, hear.) The House, there-
fore, would understand that he had risen, not from any
prejudice against the grant itself, but merely for the
purpose of stating that he thought the Noble Marquis had
been misinformed, when he stated that his Majesty's Minis-
ters bad been well advised in inserting that passage in hs
Majesty's speech to Parliament, as it had given satisfaction
generally throughout the country.
The Marquis of BUTE would again repeat that the pas-
sage in his Majesty's Speech to which he had adverted had
been well received in Scotland. He believed the greater
portion of the people of that country were in favour of the
Established Church, although he admitted that there was a
great number against it.
The petition was then laid on the table.
Mr. TIERNEY, from the Tax-office, presented papers.
Mr. CAMPBELL, from the East India House, presented
an account of the compensation and allowances to the reduced
officers of the Company.
The House adjourned at half-past five o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, 1114.8 CH 9.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at three o'clock.
A Messenger from the East India Company brought up
papers relative to compensation, on the reduction of salaries,
to officers in that service. _ _

An HON. MEMBER presented a petition in favour of the
Grand Western Railway.
Mr. E. TENNENT brought in a bill for making a road
from Belfast to Dublin.—Read a first time.
GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.

Sir R. VYVYAN said that many Members, who could not
get their names down, had petitions to present on the Great
Western Railway Bill, the second reading of which was fixed
for that evening. It would be a very great convenience if
Hon. Members were allowed to present them, and he trusted
they would do so without indulging in any lengthened obser-
vations. The Hon. Baronet then presented petitions from the
inhabitants of the City of Bristol ; from the Mayor, Borough,
and Commonalty of Bristol ; from the Chamber of Commerce
of Bristol ; and from the Bristol Dock Company, in favour of
the Bill.

Petitions were also presented in favour of the Bill from the
town of Cardiff, and the city of Exeter ; from the city of Lon-
don, by Mr. Grote ; from St. Mawes, Hereford, and Crediton ;
three from Cirencester ; from Bridport, Truro, Chard, and
Bath, by Mr. Roebuck ; and from Tipperary, by Mr. Sheil.
Lord G. STORMONT moved the second reading of the
Bill.

The Marquis of C H ANDO S complained that he had been
taken by surprise—he was obliged to oppose this Bill on the
same grounds that he did last year—that was because it would
destroy a great deal of property belonging to his constituents
in Buckinghamshire. The Bill had not been altered in any
degree, as regarded them, and he would oppose it not only
upon the second reading, but in Committee.
An HON. MEMBER said he would feel it his duty to follow
the same course.
Another HON. MEMBER said he had supposed they had ar-
rived at a time when Bills for Railways would be supported
almost as a matter of course. There was a mistaken
notion abroad that they would be hurtful to the agricultural
interest. In his opinion they would much benefit it. He sup-
ported the Bill.
The gallery was then cleared for a division.
The ayes were 165—noes not counted.
The second reading of the Bill was therefore agreed to.
On our return to the gallery, a long conversation ensued
on the subject of the Bill, which was utterly inaudible. The
Solicitor-General, Lord Granville Somerset, and others took
a part in it. It was understood that a motion was made to
refer the bill back again to the committee to which it had been
entrusted last year, and that an amendment was proposed to
the effect that the Members of the counties and places through
which the rail-road passed should be added to the list.
Mr. HUME wished to know what would be the number of
the Committee. He believed it would consist of half the
House; and he did not know where they would find a room
sufficient to hold such a number. The way in which the com-
mittees were chosen was very absurd, and must be altogether
changed, and Members must be obliged to attend. In 1826 he
proposed a plan of this kind, namely, that a given number of
Committees of a limited number of members should be cho-
sen, and a Committee, when wanted, should be drawn for,
and the members of it all obliged to attend. Until this was
done, there would never be anything like fairness. At pre-
sent, members duly attended on the last day, when there was
a scramble to get into the Committee. He submitted that
the system should be entirely altered.
Lord G. SOMERSET said the same Committee-room
they had last year was still in existence.
The motion was then put and carried.
Upon the motion of Lord G. SOMERSET, the report of the
Committee of last year was referred to the Committee.
BOROUGH OF LEEDS.

Mr. BAINES brought up a report of the Committee ap-
pointed to consider the propriety of lighting the Borough of
Leeds with gas.
Mr. HOPE presented a petition from Gloucester in favour
of the Great Western Railway.
Mr. G. BERKELEY presented similar petitions from
Wotton-under-edge, Cheltenham, and several ether places.