The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-09 00:00:00

DITY BILL.

The Bishop of OXFORD moved the third reading of
the Upton-cnm•Chalvey Marriages Validity Bill, which
was agreed to.
REGISTRATION OF DEEDS (IRELAND) BILL.
Lord LANGDALE moved the second reading of this
measure. It was not necessary for him to occupy their
Lordships' time by stating the general principles of the
Bill. The Noble and Learned Lord entered briefly.into
an account of the regulations which had been made for
registering deeds and assurances in Ireland, in the year
1785. Under the old system the expense was so great
as to prevent the Acts of Parliament from being.properly
carried out. The present measure was intended to remedy
the defects of that system.
After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE in
four of the Bill, the second reading was agreed to.

Several Bills were advanced a stage, and their Lord-
ships adjourned.

11017 SE OF COMMONS, July 8.
ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION BILL.
(Continued from our Third Edition of last night.)
Lord JOEIN RUSSELL opposed the amendment, and
said that it appeared to him that the proposition was di-
rectly against the report of the Committee of the House
of Commons. That Committee said that a change was
necessary, but the alteration they recommended was
some division of the jurisdiction, and not the abolition of
the Commission. They recommended the appointment
of some small Committee to manage details, but they
contemplated the maintenance of the present Commis-
sion. He approved of that recommendation. On the
contrary, the Hon. Gentleman proposed the abolition of
the Commission altogether. It was impossible but that
large questions should arise, sod it was proper that they
should he decided by the larger bodies of Commis-
sioners. The Hen. Gentleman said that bishops and
judges were not proper persons to manage the general
affairs of the Commission, but it was for that very pur-
pose that they proposed the appointment of paid Com-
missioners. They wished to absolve the body of the
Commissioners ire m the management of these small de-
tails, which could be much better done by the small
Committee. He thought it better, therefore, to take the
plan of the Commit ee of that House, and not to depart
from it to so large an extent as proposed by the
Hon. Gentleman, hho seemed to have lost sight of the
original caure of the appointment of the Ecclesiastical
Commission. Formerly the business of each bishopric
was managed by the bishop of the die cese. The Bishop
of Durham had 21,0001. per annum, and the Archbishop
of Canterbury 22,0001. or 23,0001. per annum, and so on.
Those who had not sufficient incomes, made up their
incomes by holding deaneries and cures in commendam;
but Parliament thought proper to make a change in that
system, and hence this Commission was appointed to
watch the carrying out of the great and important
changes introduced by Parliament. There being some
objections to the mode of working the Commission, a
Committee of that;House recommended the changes em-
bodied in this Bill, and if it passed it would not take up
much of the time of the bishops or withdraw them mate-
rially from their spiritual functions. The Honourable
Gentleman had forgotten this, and that the Commission
watched over great and large reforms, and that it should
be so constituted as to command the respect and confi-
dence of Parliament and the public. For these reasons
he trusted the Committee would not agree to the change
proposed.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said that when the Hon. Gentle-
man (Mr. Horsmin) asserted that the bishops had ten
times more income than the First Lord of the Treasury,
he laboured under a very great hallucination, for the
highest annual income of any of the right rev. body did
not amount to more than from 21,000/. to 23,000/.
Sir B. HALL said that he had at all times the highest
reverence for the Church of Ragland, and for all per-
sons connected with it, and for that reason he wished
that they should act in such a manner as to gain the
esteem and confidence of the public which he feared
their general conduct did not seem likely to produce.
He well recollected that three years since they were re-
quired to send in the returns of their annual incomes,
and in those returns it was found that the annual income
of three bishops was no less a sum than 115,418/., which
they apprehended would be reduced by the income-tax
(as they represented it) to 92,1061., but when the average
income of seven years was struck, it was found that it
amounted not to 92,1061., but to 123,4651. He would
ask, what confidence could the public have in a body
that made such mis-statements? He was not far from
concurring with those who asserted that many of the
bishops expended the moneys of the ecclesiastical fund
fur their own tenefit, notwithstanding the immense
revenue they were receiving from their respective sees,
and that this expenditure was being carried on without
any regard or attention to the wants of the clergymen
in their diocese. The Honourable Baronet then alluded

to eight palaces, on which there was expended for
building and repairing no less a sum than 143,4001.;
and he should say, relative to these palaces, that
when the Bishop uf Exeter was called upon to pay
the cess tax he refused to comply, on the grounds that
he had removed his furniture from that palace, and that
he did not reside there; and he felt it his duty to add
that the sum of 3,5001. was taken out of the ecclesias-
tical funds for the repairs of this palace, in which there
was no resident—(Hear, hear)—and when he, some
time since, asked how this sum should have been drawn,
he was answered that it was the amount of interest due.
Now, he would appeal to the House, and ask, was their
anything more unfair then that those ecclesiastical
funds should be thus intruded upon, or that those bishops
should not keep their residences in proper order at their
own expense. He should next refer to the Bishop of
Oxford, who borrowed two sums from this fund, one to
repair his palace, and the other to improve his demesne,
though the Commissioners, as a collective body, had
passed a resolution that should the cost of repairing his
palace amount to more than the sum borrowed,
lie (the Bishop of Oxford) should pay the remainder
from his own purse.--(Hear, hear.) The Honourable
Baronet then read the evidence cf Mr. Murray in

corroboration of his assertions. relative to the moneys
taken from the ecclesiastical funds by the Bishops of
Oxford, Worcester, Ripon, Gloucester, Rochester, and
Lincoln, and said that he could not avoid desig-
nating the expenditure of that money as anything else
than malappropriation, which was most monstrous, par-
ticularly when in eighty-four parishes, there were many
clergymen whose income was only 501. per annum, and
417 clergymen who had only from 501. to 100 t. per an-
num. He also thought it most absurd that at the time
of the canonries being suspended at Lincoln, the dean
of that diocese charged a large sum on the ecclesias-
tical funds tor performing service during one month in
the year, though he had at the same time the income
of five parishes. On the whole, be looked upon the pre-
sent system, as carried on, as nothing more than an un-
just and blame-worthy squandering of money, and hoped
that the House would exert themselves to put an end to
such monstrous and nefarious proceedings, particularly
as the clergy, who were the labourers in the vineyard,
better deserved it, both on account of their assiduous
attention to their duties, and on account of their dis-
tressed circumstances.—(Hear, hear.) And as to the
canons, he could call them nothing else than a most use-
less set of drones. He was therefore prepared to sup-
port any proposition that would put an end to this sort
of machinery, and that would requite the poor clergy
adequately to their functions. Thu Honourable Baronet
then referred to a circular emanating from the bishops,
requiring contributions from the public for the ap-
pointment of another bishop for the diocese of Quebec.
lie was prepared to prove that the archbishops and
bishops of England and Ireland bad only contributed
810/., while six laymen gave 9001. for this purpose.
This subject he alluded to, because the Honourable
Baronet (Sir R. H. Inglis) stated that the income of the
bishops was scarcely sufficient in consequence of the
enormous charities they gave, and he should say that
instead of the diminution referred to by the Honourable
Baronet (Sir R. H. Inglis) that there was rather a very
great increase ; for example, he would refer to the as.
sessment of Paddington, which in 1837 amounts to
112,0001., and iu 1843 to 191,1541, showing an in-
crease of the income of the bishop of that diocese
during seven years to be over 79,000!. He next referred
to the increase of the incomes of the Archbishop of
York, the Bishop of Chester, and several other bishops.
He also recollected that the Committee appointed to
investigate the system of the management of the eccle-
siastical funds, and that that Committee, on which were
the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) and the late la-
mented Member for Tamworth (Sir R. Peel), pronounced
it as being ruinous both to the lessor and lessee, and
that some plan should be adopted to abolish fines in cases
of leases for life, and other similar documents. He also
thought that it was desirable that the Committee should
inquire and know to whom the property belonged,
whether to the Church or to bishops, because he was
aware that the bishops claimed the property generally as
their own.—(Hear.) As regarded the answers given by
the bishops to the applications which had been made to
them tor information respecting their livings, pluralities,
and incomes, he could make some curious statements to
the Committee. Out of twenty-six archbishops and
bishops, sixteen only sent answers, desiring to give all
the in'ormation in their power, and eight of them re-
fused to give any information at all to the Committee.
Those eight were the Bishops of Bangor, Carlisle,
Exeter, Gloucester, Oxford, Rochester, Salisbury,
and St. David's. - Not one of those Right Reverend
prelates would give any satisfactory answers to the
Committee, and all they said was, that " the House of
Commons, or its Committees, had no right to ask them
any questions about their livings or pluralities." In
order to show the manner in which the Ecclesiastical
Commissioners had managed the affairs of the Church,
he would refer the Committee to a table showing the
number of clergymen who were now resident, and who
were receiving large incomes. By this table he found
that there were 4,307 clergymen non-resident at their
livings, and of those 937 were non-resident without any
knowledge why they were so. The sooner, then, he
must say, the bishops were sent down to their diocese,
to make those non-resident clergymen give an account
why they are not resident at their livings, the better.—
(Hear, hear.) He would read another table, which
would show that out of 4,322 benefices, 1,193 were re-
turned -without any statement of their value. To an-
other table, showing the condition of the curates. Of
3,078 curates, 1,192 had no glebe, 685 were in receipt of
incomes under 60/. a year, 610 under 801., and there
were 2,058 curates non-resident.
Sir J. PAKINGTON rose to order. He apprehended
the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir B. Hall) was departing
from the question before the Committee, and that be
ought to confine himself to the amendment, which was,
that the Ecclesiastical Commission be limited to three
Commissioners.

The CHAIRMAN thought there would bo some diffi-
culty in calling the Hon. Baronet to order in the manner
suggested, it appearing to him that the lion. Baronet
was only referring to the matters objected to, fbr the
purpose of founding an argument upon them.
Sir B. HALL said he was arguing that the Ecclesias-
tical Commissioners as at present constituted, were not
worthy the confidence of the people, and he was endea-
vouring to show that they on all occasions took care of
their own interests, while they neglected those of the
poor and hardworking clergy; and he was also endea-
vouring to show that it would be more for the benefit
of the public, and to the credit of the bishops, if they
would attend to the interests and business of their own
dioceses, where they would be far better employed,
than in attending at the Ecclesiastical Commis-
sion Board. He was end, avouring to show that the
poor curates of the Church were sadly neglected, when
the lion. Baronet (Sir John Tokenism) called him to
order. He had shown the Committee something of
what the bishops had done, and he would now show
what they had not done. Had they attended to the
promotion of the usefulness of the institutions of the
Church? There was a most useful institution, Queen
Anne's Bounty, and had they, with their pluralities, at-
tended to the proper distribution of the funds of that in-
stitution for the benefit of the poor clergy? lie found

nn the cortrury, that of that bounty the bishops had
borrowed 80,000/. fur the purpose of building and alter-
ing their own palaces. He found, on the other hand,
with !aspect t) the attendances of the bishops at the
meetings of the committees for the distribution of this
bounty. that the late Archbishop of Canterbury attended
only niati times in a numb, r of years; the Bishop of
Oxford, eight; the Bishop of Londcn and Bangor,
four times ; the Bishop of Salisbury, threw ; the
Bishop of Durham, with his 26,000/. a year, only once;
the Bishop of St. David's and the Bishop of Rochester,
once; and the Bishop of St. Asaph, with his,
16,0001. a year, attended only once at the meetings of
the committees for the benefit of the poor clergy. The
only time several cf them ever attended was when they
wanted to borrow 80,0001. from the bounty. Now, one
of the most worthy things the bishops could have done
was, to abolish pluralities; but, so far from having tried
to abolish them, he would show the contrary. In this
very dioce3e he would show that the Bishop of Loudon
was one of the greatest pluralists,. The Hon. Baronet
then enumerwe 1 several pluralities which had been
created in and since 1842, with their large and various
sources of income, and said the bishops ought to be dis-
missed at once from the Ecclesiastical Board, and that
they ought not to be let down easy. He would show, that
while the late Archbishop of Canterbury during 20 yeS"
received 174,000/., that a poor curate, from the dive of the
Christian era, would have received only 1295001., which
would leave a clear surplus in favour of the ArchbishoP
of 44,0001.—(Laughter.) The Bishop of Durham bad
been is the see 19 years, and 19 years Canon of Durham,
and had received 129,3001. The Hon. Baronet then.
directed attention to the numerous liviegs possessed
by the sons, nephews, sons-in-law, and other connexions
of the Bishop of Exeter, and said it seemed as though
the whole family were naturally parsons. He knew that
it would be said that this question was one of embar-
rassment and difficulty to the Government, but he must
say that the Committee ought to call on the Government,
without reference to inconvenience, to bring the whole
matter under the consideration of the House, and that 0
Committee should be established on which the bishops
should not be allowed to sit. ,

Sir G. GREY must say that the speech of the Hon.
Baronet who had just sat down, had, in many parts of it,
nothing whatever to do with the subject before the Com-
mittee. Some of the Hon. Baronet's statements were of
very old date. He had spoken very freely of the Eccle!
siastical Commissioners, but he ought to have known k,
that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners had not the
power to remedy the abuses of which the Honourable
Baronet complained. With regard to the episcopal re'
sidences, and the large sums of money expended on
them, every oce of the cases alluded to had been
thoroughly investigated, and it was found that the sues
laid out had not been extravagant or beyond the actug
rt cioiretnents.
Sir JOHN PAKINGTON said that many of the
statements made by the Hon. Member for Marylebone
respecting the expenditure on the episcopal residences
of the Bishop of Rochester were altogether without
foundation.

Sir BENJAMIN HALL said he had taken his in"
formatioxi from the only documents which the Eccie-
sidstical Commissioners would allow him access to•
They were never contradicted, and he bad a righh
therefore, to assume that the information was quite
correct.

Mr. GLADSTONE wished to correct an erroneous
impression which a statement made by the Honourable
Baronet the Member for Marylebone was calculated to
create. The sum of 51.0001., expended on the palace and
estate of the Bishop of Lincoln, was for the purpose 01
bringing that ecclesiastic nearer to his diocese.
Mr. C. DENISON expressed a hope that the 1-1013*
Member for Cuckermouth would not divide the Cour
mittee on the amendment. The constitution of ale
Commission, no doubt, was faulty, but it was in pre;
gress of reconstruction, and the change would be attended
with benefit.
Mr. HORSMAN could not consent to withdraw b,icei
amendment, being most desirous that the bishops should
not be burthened with secular duties, to an admitted
inability for the proper performance of their spiritual
duties.
Mr. P. WOOD quite agreed that the spiritual and
secular duties of the Commission should be separate!:
but ho was opposed to any regulation which struck ept
the secular duties at one tell swoop.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared,
For the amendment ... ... 22
Against it ... 60
Majority against the amendment —3B
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 2, which provides for the payment of tsso
out of the five of the Church Estates Commissioner'
being proposed,
Mr. EVELYN DENISON moved as an amendment'
that three of those Commissioners should receive sale;
ries. The business of those Commissioners would be 0'
considerable magnitude, as the gross amount of property
which came under their supervision would not be lest
than seventy millions. This Estate Commission was t°
consist of five members, two appointed by the Crovlo,
one by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and two by the
Ecclesiastical Commission, so that it might be said three
of those were clerical appointments. lie thought, there;
fore, that three of those ought to be paid, in order tilt
they might do their duty in that Efficient manner which •
paid officials were expected to do.
Mr. GLADSTONE opposed the amendment, as it
would be an unnecessary expenditure to pay more Lb°
two of those Commissioners.

Sir GEORGE GREY said he did not think it fleas'
sary to tax the ecclesiastical fund with more than the
payment of two Commissioners, but if it should turn 001
afterwards that the services of another paid Commissioner
was required, some person who held another office could
be appointed, and which-would save the expense to the
ecclesiastical fund. At present he could not agree to lbe
ami ndment.

Mr. P. WOOD said that it was always better to be"
a working paid committee than a gratuitous one, bon7l
ever active and responsible such might be, and he wool
therefore support the amendment. r
Sir B. HALL objected to the present constitution °f
the Commission, as there would be two Commissiosiere
on the part of the Crown, and three on behalf of the ee.
clesiastical body. He would have the Commission re'
duced to three—two on behalf of the Crown, and 4:38
appointed by the Archbishop—all three to be paid sn'
laries.
Mr. HORSMAN said he thought this was a case 1°
which Government should abide by the recommendation
of the Select Committee, and would support the amend'
merit.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, as the matter at prese-et•
stood, tvio paid Commissioners would be sufficient. 111 t
,
was found nut afterwards that number was insufficient' •
then another paid Commissioner could be added.
a
Lord HARRY VANE supported the amendment;
Mr. E. DENISON then said, ih?..t after what had ft-
len from the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Gentlero,°.
the Secretary for the Hume Department, he would N'
the present withdraw the amendment.
The clause was then agreed to, as also clauses 3, 4'
and 5.
On clause 6 being proposed, which provides for the
constitution of the Estates Commission,which Commissioe
to consist of two members appointed by the Crown,
by the Ecclesiastical Commission, and one by the Arcb
bishop or Canterbury,
Sir B. HALL moved as an amendment, that the claps:
be expunged, as, were it carried in its present shape, the
episcopal interest would have th:ise members in the Cool"
mission, while the Crown had but two.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the clause was framed in sc,
cordance with the recommendations of the Select Cool' •
mittee, and he denied that there was any ground fr.,
saying that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners were un""
to be entrusted with the appointment of two of OW
commissioners.
Mr. HUME contended that the present measure Tin
a sufficient reason why the Ecclesiastical Commission
should not be entrusted with these powers, for had lb%
done their duty as they ought there would have been no
occasion for the introduction-of such a measure.
Sir JOHN TROLLOPE supported the clause, as di
i
also
Mr. GLADSTONE, who contended that as no tins
could be done by the Commission unless one of the
Crown Commissioners was present, that gave the CrowP
a sufficient power over the other commissioners.

Mr. MANGLES held that no such power was given
by the clause as it stood, but that the Crown Commit;
sioners could be swamped by those appointed by th
episcopal interest.
Sir G. GREY said the intention of the Act of PO"
liament was, that it should be executed by two of the
Church Commissioners, and that they should be present •
on all occasions. If the amendment proposed was,
adopted, the effect would be to exclude such individual`
as the Right Hon. Member for Ripon, whose habits (,
business and capabilities they all knew.
After a few words from Mr. HENLEY,
Mr. HORSMAN observed that the majority in ths
Committee were in favour of three paid Commissioners,
and that was thrown over by the House now and re-
jected. He, for one, objected to the Archbishop of CO"
terbury and the Estates Commission having the OP;
pointment of three Commissioners, while the Crown bar,
but two---thus placing the Crown in a minority, se':
practically swamping the decision of a Committee of that
House.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared.--
For the amendment ... 33
Against it ... 76
Majority ~, —43
The clause was then agreed to,
•
On clause 7 being proposed,
Mr. E. I)ENISON suggested that the. Estate'
Commission should have the appointment of those ofq:
cers, solicitors, and surveyors necessary to carry into el
feet the business entrusted to them.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the insertion of such
words would create jealousies, and probably other evilth
and he should therefore oppose it.
Mr. GLADSTONE thought the Hon. Gentlerelln
would act with a wise discretion if he withdrew lII'
amendment, at least tor the present.
M. P. WOOD said, that as the Committee, under the
Bill, was really to be the working body, and not the
Church Commissioners, he thought they ought to bllva
the power of appointing their own officers.
The proposed amendment was, however, withdravraf
and the clause agreed to.
Chi usei 8,9, and 10 were agreed to.
On clause n being proposed,
Mr. HORS MAN asked if the Noble Lord at the bead
of the Government would consent to the amendment Ps
proposed, that the Commissioners should make an annual
report of their proceedings to Parliament Y
Sir G. GREY replied that the matter would be can"
sidered before the report was brought up.
The clause was agreed to.
Clause 13 being proposed, which related to a division
of the Episcopal and Common Fund,
On the motion of Sir G. GREY, an amendment was'
proposed, which restored the clause as it had been, before
altered in the House of Lords.

s .. -.........................
11.,
r. GLADSTONE was opposed to the alteration soi
rotde by the Government, the more particularly as the
*iteration was well considered in the House onfdLcoordms-,1;
4,„" was meant to keep separate the Episcopal
'"eu Fund. By the clause,_ as now againaltteartnedo,stboo_io
Cum-
We merged into one fund, which he thoiT,ht.
the
__, n
N ibis
tetionable. Ile objected to the motiont
ittiationofrndeJwobn Russell), because it tsnhi,,efietro, the for-
without.
bishoprics, such as
,:ly regard to the feelings of the
tablished.
peoMpleneof the locality
Lie thought that if new bishoprics were to bees .
lt should be where the public is prepared and anxious
(et! such a foundation. He would therefore move that
submitsit
suould be in the power of the Commissioners to
.oker
Majesty the foundation of a bishopric placer
s-i“ere tho people were desirous that such shouldln tslce
tviseo, and that his salary should nut be more than 1,5001.
rllinnum•—(liear hear.)
'Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the general opinion
vi s ,
f°
as
teat inhere was a very great necessity for suchrun ,
'lodation, and also to afford as much of the d ,
43 Possible for parochial use. In that view the C3ln -
tsitts
acie appointed three years since fal y concurred.
: the Archbishop of Canterbury gave it ashis.
eoupoi:
ifilt°;hthat such a course of conduct would ho most
hb .
lf,',4Bl:oouPittoanstotteheansd i ance the interest of the C urch
game time say that he dissented frome
t,l;e Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) whenl h
std that if any amalgamation of the funds took p acol,
atlehteo.uld be s-very rest impediment to the creation
a ion
bishoprics. He should next allude to the foanil
sae
st, "°ll of the bishopric of Manchester. There was an t
tsisssolute necessity for it, as the diocese of Chester was
th !rg*, and as many of the people, thro. ugh want 05;
l' yigilance of an active bishop hood -
in the neihbour
Hi,
Were,„. dissenting from the Established Church. ..
-48,"ed, did not the creation of that bishopric, with only';'
f,'"°,° Per annum tend to establish and carry out order
i'ltuke Church, considering: so large and populous a towe
lion,tuat is? He was really at a loss to know what theole
si and Learned Member meant by separating
on-
,,
ie.;°Pal from the temporal functions of the bishops,
an .
if
. 113 to exclude them from the House of Lords; _ dus!
such a liue of policy were adopted, be (Lord John Rthets
ell) believed that nothing could contribute more to
eirthsow of the Established Church in this country. •
Right he he was fully convinced was not the desire of the ‘:
pt /ion. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone). .
Mail. R. IL INGLIS said that he totally differed from •
ms sbight lion. Friend (Mr. Gladstone) in reference to;{
ehs°,„Pinion about the creation of the Bishopric of Md _
437,, because he, at the time the Noble Lord (Lord
lin, alt) mooted the matter, considered that he ( J...
p5,;,,111) had conferred incalculable benefit on that large,
t,
bar-eus and important town, and not only to the town.
With to
e,4
the diocese of Chester. He again concurred
the sine Noble Lord in the inexpediency of separating,
he 9 sPiritual from the temporal influence of the bishops, ~;
creause he considered such a course would tend to in- t;
43118,4,),.." opinion that at present prevails to some degree,
the :.Y. were anxious to eject the episcopal body from
fsr distant°use of Lords. He hoped that the day was not.`.
ih when the suffragan bishops that were
s_aiish
°di ' Be by Henry VIII. would be introduced into the ':
deoeir, use, and he should add it would be very con-
tras, °. te the interests of the people of this great me-,.
hei',"°4lB and of the Church, if a Bishop of Westminster.
ski: aPPointed to assist the Bishop of London in his
house 1 duties; and also to have a seat in the other
to ;• He at the same time, though he differed from
1550 of the sentiments of the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
Wil
ii(Mr. Gladstone), should express his concurrence
Weald
not
opposition, and hoped that the Noble L0rd.,.4
4 not press his amendment.
s.
i
h r' FIUME said that his Hon. Friend (Sir R. Ingl s),,
1.0. ,
that the time was come when the common fund
a du,. applied to the use of the bishops, but from that
._
the elated. If the Hon. Baronet wished to continua:,
tile es:c4ell
..exion of Church and State he would not oppose
hses Rill the h were adverse to this applicae-;
tabr,°, tunds that were intended by Parliament ter th
stipr°4 °f the working clergy. He should therefore
f)ort the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell).
ea. J ~
oata Pr . cARINGTON said that in the clause,ro as it*
that tk_olst the House of Lords,vision.
there
was
atelanded for
the "" surplus of the episcopal fund was in
os_ereation of new bishops, and he should therefore r,
/Ise the Nble o (Lord J. Russell). '
the r;IIGRSMAN said that the Noble Lord acted on
lila ,!I'esont occasion very justly and conscientiously in
at their of this case, though he had made a nolshs stnn i
eeel,!:end of last session in favour of the Ecclesiastics
stiteires!on. When allusion was made to the olden con-
he sh:ellistu oPposition to the creation of new bishops,
(If this ' say that the great increase of the population -....
bot i country required such a creation, and that it was
blievnppposition to the welfare and benefit of the Esta-
log 44 Church. He was even desirous that the work-
teaa- ergY •should be adequately paid, and he for that
sr0i;?(Iil felt assured that the Noble Lord's amendment
Of this be °f the greatest service to the people and clergy
zit: c,?untry.—(Hear, hear.)
grounds , lIERBER,T opposed the amendment on the '
tats
esti twit it was an innovation on the constitution of
lreb. They should look to the increase of popu- .
41-64 the present time as compared with former times.
FePul ;tire" of Henry VIII they bad but 4,000,000 of
at 4t len and they then had the same number of bishops
Piety re Present time. He could bear testimony to the •
take °4 rums? of their bishops, but the House should
the b.eskre not to overlay the mind and physical power of
to, p I,,A",°P,s. He thought the Bill had been very much
tOer°tl;" °Y the clauses which had been aided to it by
betted 7 House of Parliament; and he very much re.-
Oatien toat Use Noble Lord had expressed his determi-
With t° adhere to the Bill in its original state.—(llear.). •
tioe, rag
to the bishops not having seats in the
of , e °I• Lords, when they came to look at the increase
alicrtaulaton, he thought it most desirable that the)
Ilk tos'e seats in that House, and he agreed with an Were,
theber that their presence there constituted, as it , isit riaemocratic principle of that House, represent- .
sir BEND°eYdid, larse masses of the people.
hiss iissAMle HALL said that some Hon. Mem-
teoerat'." aPoken of the bishops as constituting the de;
heeie I? Principle in the House of Lords. Now, he (Sir
as min
11411) looked upon the bishops in that House
Cipl, stituting the very contrary of the democratic prin
INel anti be thought it desirable that they should not ,
it 0e r have seats in that House. If the bishops thought
tbete-ees3ssrY that more bishops should be created, let
he
th° that which they had never done in their lives—
iteraene: give the mesas of endowing them out of their
hot' and iene°'nes--(llear, hear, and laughter.) The
greatest isardsvrorking clergy were in a state of the
is distress, and many ot them were obliged to live
ithicilll,ll4ll2luse. lie thought that the circumstances
Poor rtlught about such a state of distress among the
leritteril ,b.ard-working clergy ought no longer to be to
Is/I% !ikw. nibs the bishops wallowed in wealth.
and hers . R. HOPE entirely dissented from the views
Ateeiarini'l!lons of the Hon. Member for Marylebone (Sir
itslitatthhakevieral ) 01l
this subject. Of all the clap-traps
been imposed on the public, that of assert-'.,
greattse.t the bishops were non-working clergy was the
workit:t,
.Nr to his knowledge, they were the most hard- kr. ftuodY in the Church.
lervatie blitimmoND only rose to make one ob-
Wise,
t:it, which was, that the Welsh gentlemen, about
to the the lion. Baronet spoke so much, should give up
slop, the the tithes of which they were in puss
~Air, se„,netherwt'"LEY would Lot give any opinion as to hot helt was desirable to endow new bishoprics or not;
..
reissienw,” quite willing to let the Ecclesiastical Com- -.
Sir Tris " the management of the fund.
came r °MAS ACKLAND supported the clause as it
kr. roin the Lords.
Posse, ?AGE WOOD said the bishops were found in
tight tsl" of certain funds, and the State thought it
their ic'n take away from the bishops a certain amount of
Were eoefte, and give it to the working clergy. There
Plied tsese oases wherein the revenues of a see were ape
of the ?s.the spread of spiritual objects, as in the case
de°, 4tahop of London, who thought it his duty the.
or 5
e" 'h I I large portion of his income to the building
tioe b "ch He (Mr. Wood) did not like the dist
of the',ween an episcopal fund and a fund for the rest
falleaseterY. Re must protest also against another
The 6'.',_ which said the bishops did not work.
bed bleuoPs worked as well as the other clergy, and
of 1,,,e..?t! extremely useful in promoting the employment
to beTtlng clergymen, and hence no distinction ought
LI drawn
between them.
seettrcig JORN MANNERS referred to a return pre- --
010.. to the House of Lords on the 12th of March last,
wed that 1,100 applications had been made to the
Whir esiasttcal Commissioners for additional curates,
ka„•h had been registered in the office of the Commis-
s
ell.s fur future consideration, and which there was no
thence of being attended to. He wished to know whether
iii. Government were prepared to point out any means •
,tlu„rant from what the House of Lords had pointed out
ei:e
_reference to the appointment of the working
ttithgY. He saw most clearly that the interests of the tesleb of England required at this moment a great ex-
er-471 of the episcopacy' and for that purpose he
'''' uPon the Committee the absolute necessity of the
%mad_
*Cr.ent.
•
. TURNER wished to ask the Government
5 ether the effect of this clause was to facilitate the
41/teintsvent of additional bishops, by throwing the in-
t:tat charges upon the common fund?
aitere clause as
ill th rd JOHN RUSSELL said that there was nothing
f all livings,
he proposed it to interfere with the
aed ;4°ll of Parliament, in the increase os am
ueiti or the future formation of bishoprics for eecrl,estihaas;
511 5 Purposes. It would be necessary,
sbetilPlications for the augmentation of however,
lelivings
cobidd,_ be satisfied out of the common fund, before
.it
Lorude available for the formation of new bishoprics e
off j°I:IN MANNERS said that if such were th
srZetilo,f the
necessity for
clause, the new bishoprics, the
generttliti the present state of the English Church was
et, 11,7 admitted, would never be formed ; as there
Ibrie,“°° aPplications for the augmentation of smal
Iwo Th. which could not be satisfied, now pending be-
, The ue Comrnisaio
a es__ . D.
t.sumMittee then divide], and the numbers were—
? ,the amendment... 163
... -agalust it 111
.the el Majority
„52 eietw'ants was then agreed to as amended.
0,, le 14 was agreed to.
sir, DI 15 being Proposed,
Port
~,,,I4SRELI suggested that as the House appeared,
Dort -rearied with this subject, the Chairman should re-
lit!! ogress, and the House ass other business.
111° ld 8.
lIERRERT then P to
411...rejp.ort progress moved that the Chairman,
• 1
Pl:oves.-81140,114,
atinaciSELL said he could not consent to this
Iluttee upon ~ that he must take the sense of the Com-
Tha nll 11"
took 1- " Lords al
p ace, aen cleared for a division, but none
eanwhile to the ulebu Russell having acceded in tie
, mien to report progress.
The IT
„,
—OllBO the res wrlreal, and obtainecilledi
,
ofer to sit again.
and the Chairman rep)rted
th:l,.? Incorporation 1
seoopalation Bill went rirlabil Corporation Bill and
to_ ached.
Prqua"edgiartcultui :tough. Committee, certain
r tatting
~ 5 a . the latter lid) by Mr. Macgregor,)
1 statistics of Greet Britain'

PARLIAMEN TARY DIVISIONS.

From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of COMMIS&

MONDAY, JULY S.
ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION BILL.
(IN THE COMMITTEE.)
First Clause (Appointment of Church Estate Commis-
isioners) : - Amendment proposed page 2, line 21, to leave
out from the word "England" to the end of the Clause, and to
add the words " and the three Church Estates dommis-
'sioners so appointed shall together and exclusively constitute
the body corporate of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for
'England, and be entitled to exercise all their powers and
privileges," instead thereof : —Question put, " That the words
proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause." The Com-,
mittee divided:—
I MAJORITY—AYES, 60.
-

Acland, Sir T. Gladstone, W. E. Pakington, Sir John
Adair, It. Shafto Greene, Thomas Palmer, Roundell
Barnard, Edward G. Grey, Sir G. Parker, John
Bellew, R. M. Guest, Sir:J. Plumptre, J. P.
Bennet, Philip Hamilton, Geo. A. Pusey, P.
Birch, Sir T. Hatchell, John Romilly, Sir John
Blair, Stephen Heald, James Russell, Lord J.
Busfeild, W. Ilerbert, Sydney Seymour, Lord
Chatterton, Colonel Hobhouse, Sir John Shell, R. L.
Cowper, W. F. Hobhouse, T. B. Slaney, R. A.
Craig, Sir W. G. Hodges, T. L. Somerville, Sir IV.
Crowder, R. E. Hood, Sir Alexander Spooner, Richard
Cubitt, William Hotham, Lord Stafford, Augustus
Denison, J. E. Inglis, Sir R. 11. Stanley, E. 11.
Drummond, Henry Lacy, H. C. Thompson, Colonel
Dundas, Sir David Lewis, G. C. Vivian, J. E.
Ebrington, Lord M'Cullagh, W. T. Wilson, James
Elliot, John Matheson, Colonel Wood, W. P.
Evans, William Naas, Lord TELLERS.
Evelyn, William J. O'Brien, J. Hill, Lard mamas
Frewen, C. H. Paget, Lord A. Haytcr, W. G.

MINORITY-NOES, 22.
Adair, Hugh E. Henry, Alexander Perfect, R.
Bass, M. T. Heyworth, L. Thompson, George
Bright, John Humphery, Ald. Thornely, Thomas
Brown, 11. Kershaw, James Williams, John
Brown, William Lushington, Charlet!
Childers, J. W. Mangles, R. D. TELLIIII.
Cobden, R. Martin, J. Hall, Sir B.
Ellis, John Mitchell, T. A. Horsman, Edward
Fox, W. J. O'Connor, FearguS

`Prince.
His Royal Highness Prince Albert, attended by
his Equerry in Waiting, immediately proceeded to
Cambridge-house to pay a visit of condolence to her
Royal Highness the Duchess of Cambridge and his
Royal Highness Prince George. Prince Albert re-
mained until a quarter before eleven o'clock, and then
returned to Buckingham Palace, attended by Lieu-
tenant-Colonel Hon. A. Gordon.
Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Gloucester
remained some time longer with her afflicted re-1

Mr. Edmond Mildmay, Equerry to his late Royal
Highness, is staying at Dover to attend her Royal
Highness the Hereditary Grand Duchess of Meek-
lenburgh Strelitz (daughter of his late Royal High-
ness) on her landing, the Hereditary Grand Duchess
having been sent for from the Continent

The deceased Prince Adolphus Frederick, who
was the seventh and youngest son of George 111.,
iliad completed the 76th year of his age, having been •
born on the 24th of February, 1774. In the 13th :
year of his age he was, with his two elder brothers,
the Dukes of Cumberland and Sussex, sent to the '
University of Gottingen, where he was entered on
the 6th of July, 1786. The Duke of Cambridge
remained at Gottingen only three years, at the end of
which period he became an officer in the British
army, having been gazetted an ensign in the six-
teenth
year of his age, but it was not until 1793 that
he came to reside in England. The position in which
England then stood was one of the utmost danger,
and fraught with the utmost anxiety to the mo-
narch and statesmen of this country, and the political
parties into which our community never ceases to
be divided laboured with their usual zeal and ar-
dour to acquire a fresh auxiliary in the person
of the Duke of Cambridge. He was courted
alike by Tory and by Whig. On the one
hand he was solicited by Fox, Sheridan,
the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Sussex, and the
Duchess of Devonshire—on the other, he was
prompted by the natural prejudices of a Prince, and"
he filial affection due to a kind father, and after a
short coquetting with Liberalism, he became a firm
,upporter of Mr. Pitt. In the same year that he
:ame to England (1793) he served for a short time
vith the British forces before Dunkirk. In 1794 he
attained the rank of Colonel, and on the 24th of
August, 1798, that of Lieutenant-General, being then
inly 24 years of age. It was not, however, till the
7th of November, 1801, that he obtained his peer-
Age, when he was created Duke of Cambridge, Earl
of Tipperary, and Baron of Culloden.
On the part of the King's Government there ap-
dears then to have been every disposition to give the
•ons of the monarch the fairest possible opportunities
.f acquiring renown in the profession of arms, and
ilthoegh the expedition to Holland in 1799, corn. '.
!minded by the Duke of York, achieved no success,
vet the Duke of Cambridge was subsequently
intrusted with another army, intended to ob•
itruct the progress of Bonaparte on the continent.
In the year 1803 he was sent at the head of' 8,000
Germans and 6,000 English to defend the electoral
'dominions of his father. That the Hanoverians,
s,
however, did not appreciate as highly as might have
been wished, the honour and advantage of a connexion ,
with England, and the Duke found, when he arrived
in Hanover, that the interest of his family there was
at an end, and be therefore requested his recall. The
English Minister, however, told him that his duty was
to remain at his post; but after publishing a manifesto
to the Hanoverians, calling on them to rise en masse,
which produced no effect, he returned to England,
leaving the army under the command of Count
Walmoden, who was soon obliged to capitulate. Im-
mediately
on the formation of the German Legion,
the Duke of Cambridge was appointed to its com-
mand, having been raised to the rank of General on -
the 25th of September, 1803, and appointed Colonel ~
of the Coldstream Guards on the sth of the same
month, in the year 1805.
As soon as the French were expelled from Han-
over the Duke of Cambridge was appointed Viceroy,
and in the possession of that Government he re-
mained till the year 1837, when Ernest, Duke of
Cumberland, succeeded to that kingdom as eldest
male representative of the house of Guelph. In the
government of that little state the Duke of Cambridge
displayed the moderation and kindly feelings by
which he has, during the present reign, been so fa-
vourably known in this country, and within four
years after his accession to office he effected consider-
able and salutary reforms. He not only very much
reduced the army, but made the nobles liable to share
in all the public burdens ; and thus matters went on
in Hanover for about 15 years, when the general
movement throughout Europe, hich expelled Charles
X. from the throne of France, rendered it necessary
for the Sovereign of Hanover to bestow upon that
kingdom a constitutional form of government. This
was notes however, a very happy experiment, and it:
was one of the earliest acts of King Ernest, after his .
accession in 1837, to withdraw it.
On the 26th of November, 1813, the Duke of Cam-
bridge was raised to the rank of Field-Marshal in the
army, and in consequence of the death of the Princess
Charlotte he, like many other members of the Royal
family, contracted a matrimonial alliance. At Cassel,
on the 7th of May, and in London on the Ist of June,
1318, he was united to Augusta Wilhelmina Louisa,
the third daughter of the Landgtrhaivse
marriage
ec
he
Hesse-Cassel, a Princess then in the 21st year of her
Pretso-FOItTES rOlt THE MlLLlON.—Nothing
g ofhloautsee than
had' one son and two daughters. On the accession of
opnleeasoefdthues
leading
her present Majesty, the Duke of Cambridge trans-
the pro i with which ferred his residence from Hanover to this country,
s. in London has responded to the
mpNt.—tudNe othing has . and renewed the friendly relations in which he had
D'Almaine and Co. havtlitne". The old-established firm of '
oef7r some time past submitting always stood with the higher classes of society in ts
general call for cheap country, and with almost every public body. Although,
to the public instruments
lwalnut, maple, maho- ,Ilike the Duke of Sussex, he took a prominent
at the marvellous
variety of beautiful -oar: ate excellence, in every 1 position in the support of charitable institutions,
of these pianos has •
gang, zebra, satin, wood,and suchro sre S:
O. the talented Messrs.'
price of 25 guineas each. The rapid ''l;
capnioans on this impor- he differed greatly from that prince in his manage- -
for some time ment of the duties of that position, and his
indeed, confirmed the prognosticationssa
Chambers, of Edinburgh, m whose ointerpretation of those duties. He was not to be
found always in smooth water. He did not think it,
tans subject Messrs. D'Alrnaine and
ully coincided. These elegant instrument: his sole duty to preside over turtle and venison, or to
;quality that can be desired; there tone is richP7osr every angle for bank-notes. He did not seek solely to dig-
quality great sweetness, while their touch is so elastic gall Yell solemnity to the
!lily that which was harmonious, or to give grace and
passages of repetition may be performed with exquisite pr
cision and delicacy. Much has been plausibly said late;.;
respecting the advantage of adopting the Norwegian pine there
for the exterior of pianos, as a means of effecting reduction. If
of price. Messrs. D'Almaine have manufactured, and are •
fessional administrative skill of others. Oo
the contrary, wherever there was difficulty or dispute,
was the Duke of . Cambridge in the midst of it.
a close committee of some charity in which he was
i;tsterested became split into parties or torn by pro-
rstill manufacturing, several of this kind; but they are oil
opinion that the softness of deal renders it unfit for a piano,' rivalry, he would suddenly make his sp-
as every bruise it receives causes an indentation, which can- Clearance on a committee-day, take the chair as presi-
-1
the charity without notice or ceremony, and,
a very short time, either compose the quarrel
would o not be effaced. They have, therefore, come to the very wise• dent of
giwnhat was equally important, put the burden and dis-i
determination of placing the smallest possible profit upon
their instruments, in order that the public may reap the full or,
, advantage of " Piano-Forte Reform." The manufacture of
11,4
good pianos has so long been a monopoly, that the first
would ea
e investi arcrg
i! dispute on the right shoulders. Ile,
ifithcee most minute circumstances, and he
whisper of " revolution " must doubtless have occasioned', none of his own dignity in'
some commotion among the London masters. Yet as minds t . g in
sof the highest intelligence are always the most ready to ad-9 took care that others should notperilthe •
vocate improvement; so have we been prepared for the an-
nouncements which have lately emanated from the highly i
respectable establishment of Messrs. D'Almaine and Co.; and i 4 the breach was strongly *
very existence of the German
as in this reformation they have had the courage to appear - v : •
.first in the field, so do we most heartily wish them success in - P
I
their new and moat useful undertaking. i their disputes or intrigues. This h •
erilled by a dispute amongst its
more successfully exhibited in
charity by
taint of rushing into
shows in 1847, when the
Uospital at Deleon was,
,
officers, and still
I
the same year at thel

Thirteenth Clause (Surplus of Episcopal Fund may bel
transferred to the Common Fund):—Amendment proposed
in page 6, line 9, to leave out from the words " expedient
that" to the end of the Clause, in order to add the words'
" the said Episcopal Fund and the Common Fund vested Inl
the said Commissioners should form one fund applicable tol
all the purposes conducive to the efficiency of the Established
Church now separately provided for by the said Episcopa.
Fund and Common Fund respectively; Be it Enacted, That
from and after the passing of this Act, the fund accrued and
accruing to the said Ecclesiastical Commissioners under the
first-recited Act, and all other the moneys, revenues, and
property carried to or deemed part of the said Episcopal
Fund, or which, if this Act had not been passed, might have
been carried to or deemed part of the said Episcopal Fund, or
have been applicable to the purposes thereof; shall be carried
to and form part of the Common Fund mentioned in the
said secondly.recited Act, and be applicable to the purposes
of such Common Fund; and that all the several payments
Ind provisions now payable out of or charged upon the said
Episcopal Fund and Common Fund respectively, or out of or
upon the property applicable to the purposes of the said re-
spective Funds, or which, if this Act Is id not been passed,
might have been payable out of or charged upon such funds
and property respectively, shall and may be payable out of
end charged upon the said Common Fund and the property
applicable, and under this Act and otherwise to become ap-
iilicable, to the purposes thereof," instead thereof: - Question
put, " That the words proposed to be left out stand part of
the Clause." The Committee divided :
MINORITY—AYES, II 1.
Acland, Sir T. D. Estcourt, J. B. B. 3leux, Sir H.
Adclerley, C. B. Farrer, James Miles, William
Arbuthnott, lion. H. Floyer, John Moore, G. H.
Bagge, William Forbes, W. Morgan, 0.
ilaldwin, Barry Frewen, C. 11. Mundy, William
Barrinzton, Viscount Galway, Viscount Naas, Lord
Bateson, Thomas Gaskell J. M. Neeld, John
Bennet. Philip Gladstone, W. E. Neeld, Joseph
Beresford, William Goddard, A. L. Newry, Viscount
Best, John Gordon, Admiral O'Brien, Sir Lucius
Blackstone, W. Gore, W. R. 0. Plowden, W. H.
Boldcro, H. G. Granby, Marquis of Portal, Melville
Booth, Sir R. G. Greene Thomas Repton, G. W. J.
Bowles, Admiral lalsey, T. P. Seymer, H. K.
Boyd, John Hamilton, G. A. Sibthorp, Colonel
Bremridge, Richard Heneage, G. 11. W'. Simeon, John
Brisco, M. Ilerbert,_Sidney Smyth, Jc lin George
Broadley, Henry Hervey, Lord A. Sotheron, T. 11.
!suck, Lewis W. Hildyard, T. B. T. Spooner, R.
Burroughes, H. Hill, Lord E. Stafford, Augustus
Chichester, Lord J. Hood, air A. Stanford, J. F.
Christopher, R. Hope, Alexander Stanley, Edward
Clive, H. B. Hamby, John Stuart, Henry
Cocks, T. S. Hudson, G. Stuart, J.
Cole, H. A. Hughes, W. B. Thompson, Alderman
Colvile, C. R. Inglis, Sir R. Thornhill, G.
Conolly,ThomaS Johnstone, Sir J. Trollope, Sir J.

.. _ ~.„✓
Corry,„ H. L. Jolllffe, Sir n . G. Turner, George
Dickson,l Samuel Jones, Captain Vesey, Thomas
Disraeli, B. lEn.lx, Colonel Vyse, R. H. .

Dod, J. W.
Dodd, George

Lockhart, W. Wegi-Prosser, F.
Lowther, Colonel Wclby, G. E.

Drummond, Henry Lygon, General Westhead, J. P.
Duckworth, Sir J. M'Gregor, John Wodehouse, E.
Duncombe, A. Duncan Worcester, Marquis
Dundas, G. Mahon, Viscount TELLEIIs.

Edwards, Henry Manners, Lord C. Mackenzie, W. F.
Egerton, W. T. Manners, Lord J. Pakington, Str J.

MAJORITY—NOES, 163.
tbdy, Sir Thomas Grey, Sir G. Paget,-,Lord A.
Adair, Hugh E.
It.
A.
Shafto
Bail, SirGrosvenor,B. Lord R. Paget, Lord G.
Adair,Palmerston, Vis.
Alcock, Thomas Hastie, Alexander Parker, John
Inson, Colonel Hatchell, John Patten, W.
Archdall, Captain llawes, Benj. Pechell, Sir G.
Bagshaw, John Headlam, T. E. Pelham, D. A.
Baines, M. T. Heald, James Perfect, Robert
Baring, Sir F. T. Henley, J. W. Pigott, Francis
Bass, Thomas Henry, Alexander Pilkingten, James
Bellew, R. M. Heywood, James Plumptre, J. P.
Berkeley, Admiral lleyworth, L. Pusey, Philip
Berkeley, H. F. Hobhouse, Sir John Rawdon, Colonel
Berkeley, C. L. G. Hobhouse, T. B. Ricardo, Osman
Birch, Sir T. Hodges, T. L. Rice, E R.
Blackall, S. W. Hollond, Robert Rich, Henry
Blair, Stephen Horsman, Edward Robartes, T. J.
make, M. J. llotham, Lord Romilly, Colonel
Blevritt, Reginald Howard, Lord E. Romilly, Sir John
Bouverle, E. P. Howard, C. W. Russell, Lord John
Boyle, Colones Howard, E. G. Salwey, Colonel
Bright, John Howard, Sir R. Sandars, George
Brotherton, Joseph Hume, Joseph Scholetleld, William
Buller, Sir J. Y. Hutt, William Seymour,•Lord
Buxton, Sir E. Jervis, Sir John Shell, R. L.
Carter, John B. Ker, Rickard Smith, Vernon
Childers, J. W. Kershaw, James Smith, John Abel
Cholmeley, Sir M. King, P. J. Smith, John B.
Clay, James Labouchere, Henry Somerville, Sir W.
Cobden, Richard Lascelles, W. S. Spearman, H. J.
Cockburn, Alex. Lemon, Sir C. Strickland, Sir G.
Coke, Edward K. Lennard, T. B. Stuart, Lord Dudley
Collins, William Lewis, G. C. Stuart, Lord J.
Cowan, Charles Lindsay, Colonel Tancred, H. W.
Cowper, W. F. Littleton, E. R. Thompson, Colonel
Craig, Sir W. G. Locke, Joseph Thornely, T.
Crowder, It. B. 111`Cullagh, W. Tollemache, F. J.
Davie, Sir H. Mangles, R. D. Townley, R. G.
Denison, J. E. Marshall, J. G. Tafnell, Henry
D'Eyncourt, C. T. Marshall, William Vane, Lord H.
Duncan, Cleorge Martin, John Vivian, J. H.
Dundas, Admiral Martin, C. W. Wakley, Thomas
Dundas, Sir D. Matheson, Colonel Walmsley, Sir J.
Dunne, Colonei Maule, Fox Willcox, Brodie
Ebrington, Viscount Melgund, Viscount Willoughby, Sir H.
Evans, William Milner, W. M. Wilson, James
Ferguson, Sir R. Moffatt, George Wilson, Matthew
Fitawilliam, G. W. Morris, David Wood, Sir Charles
Fortescue, J. W. Mostyn, E. M. L. Wood, W. P.
Fox, w. J.
Mowatt, Francis Wrightson, W.B.
Freestun, Colonel M
' Gibson, Thom ulgrave, Earl Wyvill, 8.1.
Glyn, G. C. 48 H. Norreys, Sir D.
Grattan, H O'Brien, Jolla
enry TELLIZII.
Greene, John Ogle, S. C. Hill, Lord M.
Grentell, C. Pascoe
Osborne, Ralph Hayter, W. G.
Owen, Sir John

MiddlesldenuEccetroThfoasdtPhitetaakpl ,e
Duke of
.0
Cambridge
from
er
hi
d.gy similar,
!having been withdrawn by the Hon. Member, after a ,
brief conversation, in the course of which Mr. Come- -4,
wall Lewis showed that, from their complicated details, 1 DEA.TII
e• of the R
; .7,,
!:,.
ad
ni disturbance Ucrobn
erer
ae s
at chmaeueislmea sbb, i
et;
oyal Family, and as a public'nean. In private'
OF THE
they would entail an amount of difficulty in the enume-
_''.
r.stion which would have the effect of considerably th.- DUKE OF CA.MBRIDGE ':4- life he was equally irreproachable; and, though many)
laying the completion of the proposed census. .. . ez
members of our Royal Family have earned and continue
—O--
The Population (Ireland) Bill also passed through 1 4:to deserve a great amount of popular esteem, yet that
Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Gloucester Prince must indeed be considered fortunate who
Committee
Her
at Cambridge-house at half-past eight o'clock : leaves behind him a fairer reputation than the Duke
The nand) Assessments Assessments Bill, the Landlord and
Tenant (Ireland) Bill, and the Merchant Seamen's Fund . .
Bill, were ordered to b© withdrawn. 1 yesterday morning to learn the state of her royal i'` of Cambridge.
ibrother.
The Railway Audit Bill was also withdrawn,
Mr. CARDWELL end Mr. LoCKE regretting that Go-3 The medical gentlemen having met yesterday, is-
; vernment had not found it practicable to carry through': the following bulletin:—
`such a measure, which in the present state of the railway "Cambridge House, July 8.
interest was so much wanted. .1 ' The Duke of Cambridge was in a very exhausted
Mr. LABOUCHERE regretted that the Bill had come'e state during the night, but his Royal Highness has rat-
down from the House of Lords at so late a period of • lied considerably this morning.
the session ; but knowing that it would meet with con- '' " FRANCIS HAWKINS, M.D.
siderable opposition, there would be no chance of carry- • " THOMAS WATSON, M.D.
ing it through in any reasonable period. It was much to " RICHARD BRIGHT, M.D.
be desired that a correct system of audit should be eats- , " ROBERT KEATE, Ch.
Wished, but he could not give a pledge that the Govern- " HENRY STANHOPE ILLINGWORTH, Ch."
went would bring in any measure on the subject early , His Royal Highness Prince George went from
next session. , Cambridge-house in the forenoon to Buckingham
HOME-MADE SPIRITS IN BOND BILL. • Palace, and had an interview with her Majesty.
On the order of the day being real for going into . The Queen and Prince Albert arrived at Cembrilge-
Committee on this Bill. house in the middle of the day, and were received by
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
her Royal Highness the Duchess of Cambridge, ac-
Abet be felt it to be his duty to oppose the further pro-;,e .
, companied by Prince George and the Princess Mary.
r The Equerries in Waiting, Colonel Buckley and igress of the measure. He had to move as an amend-
-1
;moot that that the Hone do go into Committee on the . .
Lieutenant- Colonel the Hon. Alexander Gordon, at-
lßill that day three months.
i!tended the Queen and the Prince on horseback.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ... ... 121 4- Her Majesty and Prince Albert took leave of the
Against it ... ••• ... ... 120 , Duchess of Cambridge about 1 o'clock.
Majority for the amendment ... --1 .7. In consequence of the serious indisposition of his
The Bill was consequently lost. `• Royal Highness the following notice was issued
Lord NAAS then gave notice that, early next. yesterday :
session, he would introduce a similar measure on the e "Lord Chamberlain's-office, July 8, 1850.
subject. '..; "Notice is hereby given, that owing to the alarming
Mr. MACGREGOR was proceeding to move that a illness of his Royal Highness tho Duke of Cambridge,
schedule exhibiting a form for classing the occupations the Drawing Room, intended to be held by her Majesty
of the population ba printed and added to the Popula- e
at St. James's Palace, to-morrow, the 9th inst., and the
tion Bill, when ". State Ball, at Buckingham Palace, on Wednesday next.
An HoN. MEMBER moved that the House be counted, ' the 10th inst , will not take place."
and there being only twenty-seven Members present, : Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Gloucester
The House adjourned at a Quarter to Two o'clock. e
returned to Cambridge-house at half-past nine o'clock
' last night, and ten minutes afterwards the Duke of
Cambridge expired.
i, The following is the bulletin announcing the death
‘ 'of his Royal Highness :
" Cambridge-house, July 8,1850.
Ten o'clock, P.M.
" His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, acter
passing a tranquil day, expired somewhat suddenly, and
without suffering, at twenty minutes before ten o'clock.
" FRANCIS HAWKINS, M.D.
" THOMAS WATSON, M.D.
" RICHARD BRIGHT. M.D.
" ROBERT KEATE. Ch.
" HENRY STANHOPE ILLINGWORTH, Ch.
" EDWARD H. HILLS, Ch."
Directly after the decease of his Royal Highness,
Major Baron Knesebeck, principal Equerry to the
Royal Duke, went to Buckingham Palace to announce!
the melancholy intelligence to the Queen and the

We are informed that his Royal Highness was at-
tacked by indisposition on the 13th ult., with cramp
in the stomach, but after the severity of the attack'
had passed away all danger was thought to be over.
The Royal Duke was attended by Dr. Francis Haw
kites; Dr. Bright, Dr. Watson, Mr. Keate, and Mr.'
J. Illingworth, and it was judged up to within the,
last few days that he would recover, although suffer-
ing from loss of appetite and much debility. We
deeply regret to say that the Royal Duke recent!)
became so debilitated and prostrated, not being able
to sustain any nourishing subs'ance on his stomach
chat he continued to sink rapidly during the last 24
hours,until at the above-mentioned hourhisßoyalHigh-
ness expired without a struggle. Her Royal High-
ness the Duchess of Cambridge, who during her royal
husband's illness has evinced the greatest solicitude,
was at the bedside of his Royal Highness up to the
minute of his dissolution, and it is needless to observe
in a very distressed state of mind at her irreparable
bereavement. His Royal Highness Prince George
of Cambridge, on leave of absence from his minter.)
duties in Ireland, was also present at the death of his
Royal Highness. The only member of the late Royal'
Duke's family absent from this country (but to whom
intelligence of his serious illness was forwarded last
week), was his eldest daughter the Princess Augusta.
at present with her husband, the Hereditary; Grand
Duke of Mecklenburg Strelitz in Germany,
Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Gloucester, on
receipt of the mournful information, was most pain
fully affected, although partially prepared for the
fatal result of her brother's illness, having been with
aim at Cambridge House in the early part of the day.
It is difficult to say what was the positive cause of
death ; gout, and a *complication of clisorders of the
stomach, is however stated to be the cause.
A royal messenger was dispatched to Lord John
Russell with the sad news shortly after the Aoyat
Duke expired;; also to Viscount Palmerstob, by tvhom
a Cabinet courier was to be sent to the King of
Hanover, at Hanover ; the King of the Belgians, the
Hereditary Grand Duke of Mecklenbutg.Strelitz,and
the other connexions of the Royal Family in Germany.

BARON DUPIN AND SIR R. PEEL

The following letter has been received by his Royal
Highness Prince Albert from Bsron Charles Dupin,
President of the French Commission-General for the
Exhibition of 1851 :

" A son Altesse Royale le Prince Albert, President dela
Commission Royale Britannique pour l'Exposition de
toutes les Nations,
" Le President de la Commission National Franclise.
" Prince,—Je suis charge de transmettre a la Com-
mission que pi elide votre Altesse Royale l'expressioe
fun sentiment douloureux qui nous subtle.
" A premier rang parmi les membres de votre Com-
mission, les nations ilangeres aux quelles votre. Expo.
,ition fait appel 6:aient flittess do compter le legislateut
Lilustre que long temps administra son pays avec bon you
loir et justice pour les autres
" Nos cceurs Fracc its soot encore dams par lea der-
aieres paroles qu'il sit prononce dans le Parlement Bri-
tannique d'estitne et d' amigo pour notre patrie.
"En apprenant la perte ina•tendua et lamentable de c(
grand homme d'e•at, la Commission Nationale de Franc(
a dezide d'une voix unanime que son President vows ex
primerait les regrets sentis et profonds qu'elle partage
avec les times ge, e:euses non seulment des trois Roy•
aumes Britanniques, mail de tousles autres etats ou l'or
tient en estime le genie, la moderation, "amour des art:
et le respect de la paix.
"Si quelque chose pout nousconsoler c'est is pow 6: qui
"esprit equitable et liberal de Sir Robert Peel, loin d'etri
6:eint, survit et grandit dans la commission dont it e;aii
un si digne ornament.
" J'ai l'honnenr de saluer votre Altesse Royale avec if
'plus profond respect,
" B iron CHARLES DUPIN."