The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-17 00:00:00

QUARTER SESSIONS.

Mr. HAWES said that a Bill respecting the quarter
sessions in cities and boroughs had been brought in by
the Hon. and Learned Member for Worcester (Sir T.
Wilde). As the Bill was first introduced, the Right Hon.
Baronet the Secretary of State was not prepared to
support it. Since then some alterations had been made
in the Bill ; he now wished to know whether they were
such as the Right Hon. Baronet would have wished, and
whether in its present shape the Government was pre-
pared to support the Bill
Sir. J. GRAHAM said the alterations that had been
made in the Bill were certainly introduced at his (Sir
J. Graham's) request ; but he had received some repre-
sentations from several Recorders on the subject, which
he thought were entitled to further consideration ; he
thought, also, that there was not much necessity for
legislating on the question at all, since the Secretary of
State haXpowers, under the Municipal Act, to make re-.'
gulations according to varying circumstances.
Mr. HAWES said the Bill stood for to-morrow. He
wished to know if it would come on so early.
Sir J. GRAHAM said the Government had no wish
that the Bill should be proceeded with.
POOR-LAWS.

Sir R. PEEL (by command) laid papers relative to
the poor-laws on the table of the House.
EXECUTION OF CRIMINALS IN THE EAST.
Mr. M. MILNES wished to know from the Right
Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, whether
he had any objection to lay on the table of the House
when convenient, the papers respecting the negotiations
between her Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople
and the Ottoman Porte, with regard to the execution of
criminals on religious grounds. He understood that
those negotiations had terminated in a manner satisfac-
tory and honourable to all parties.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said, he was not prepared
to lay all the papers on the subject on the table, as the
publication of them at the present moment might be ob-
jectionable.
PUBLIC OFFICERS.

Mr. WYSE moved for a return of the names, offices,
places of birth, salaries, and ages of all persons bolding
offices in the Customs, Excise, and Post-office Depart-
ments of the United Kingdom, with the dates of their
appointment, and present location. It would be unne-
cessary for him to impress on the House the importance
of the motion. The officers employed in the public de-
partments collected large sums of money, and
they were paid large sums of money. He
admitted that there was no small improvement
in those departments within the last ten years.
He should like to see the service of the public offices
made as much a profession as the Bar or the Church, and
examinations established to try the fitness of parties to
fill those offices. There were some instances in which
that system had been tried with very good effect—
in the War-office, the Excise, and the Treasury.
With respect to the public service in different parts of
the empire, he thought there ought to be some recipro-
city on the subject, that Englishmen should be employed
in England, Scotchmen in Scotland, and Irishmen in Ire-
land. He thought it was unfair to exclude altogether the
people of one country from employment in a particular
department.
Sir R. PEEL decidedly objected to the returns moved
for. He could not discover from the spirit of the Right
Hon. Gentleman's speech the object of the returns. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had complained that there was
not a due proportion of Irishmen employed in the
various departments under the Government in Ireland.
The Right Hon. Gentleman told the House that
the Secretary of the Post-office in Ireland was
not an Irishman. But, then, the Secretary to the
Post-office in Scotland was an Irishman.—(Hear,
hear, and a laugh.) The Right Honourable
Gentleman complained that the gentleman at the head
of the police in Ireland was not an Irishman. But he
(Sir R. Peel) would remind the Right Hon. Gentleman
that wheel it became his (Sir R. Peel's) duty to appoint
two gentlemen to superintend the operation of the New
Police Act, and to govern the police force, he ap-
pointed two Irishmen.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
He thought not of Englishmen, of Irishmen, or of
Scotchmen, but of the two best men he could find for the

duty to be performed, and he appointed two Irishmen,
desiring no credit for such appointment. Now, suppose
some Englishman were to make a similar motion with
respect to recent appointments in China, what would
the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Wyse) say to it? Who
was the Pleniopentiary in China? Sir Henry Pottinger,
an Irishman?—(Hear, hear.) Who was the commander
of the troops in China? Sir Hugh Gough, an Irishman.
—(Hear, hear.) But who thought of complaining of
these appointments, or of asking any questions as to
them, or their country, or their birth? Again, whom
had they selected for the chief command in India ?
Sir Hugh Gough.—(Hear, hear.) But what was the
purpose the Right Hon. Gentleman had in view in
asking for these returns ? he asked for the names and
places of birth of all the persons employed in the Excise,
Customs, Post-office, and Revenue Police of Ireland—
but for what earthly purpose he (Sir Robert Peel) was
at a loss even to guess. How many persons should the
House suppose were employed in these several establish-
ments ? In the Customs there were 11,000 em-
ployed ; in the Excise, 6,000 persons; in the Post-
office, 3,000 persons ; in the Revenue Police,
2,000: total, 22,000 persons. And of these 22,000 per-
sons, the Right Hon. Gentleman wanted the age, ap-
pointment, and he (Sir R. Peel) knew not what besides.
And when he had got them, who was there in
the House that would move the printing of them ?
hifeetnhedloinoenoivaraabnlye
pGaerntiteleamlaarn
ctahsoeu, tlet hhta
mtinjustice had
specify
that
case, and call for inquiry ; but he must protest against
such a motion as the present. He could not sanction
any such principle. He did not believe that when any
publicperson
owasffi calledce a) upon
. inquiry
to appoint
irylrasel_e an individual
rmadeaat to
u what
a at
was the place of that individual's birth.—(Cheers.)
He did not believe that the circumstance of any man's
being born in Ireland would create the slightest preju-
dice against him. They were about to call upon 22,000
persons to state the localities of their birth. He had
shown that such a return would lead to the most erro-
neous inferences being drawn ; but it was not upon that
ground that he opposed it. He thought it was not right
in the House to sanction the principle upon which this
motion was founded.—(Cheers.) We were all subjects of
the same Sovereign, were all united in the enjoyment of
the same rights and privileges, andcdetpiwacer
contended
ought
tdt
einvdoe
rttehtgaoti
vaaedln-1
mit any distinctions as to the locality of birth. On that
ttgohrel
toruenrihg.i
fs.hihaemrp
zpoep(ns)
ipnraotnEsi
nceipde
initthliseNi mi
Scotchmen.
FoetiivzoeEnr
yN.
Sir R. PEEL—The last appointment to the United
States.—(Cheers,)
Mr. Y. FRENCH did not deny that some Irishmen
were appointed to situations of authority, but he still
declared that all the higher officers in England and Ireland
were filled by Englishmen and Scotchmen. OfBo,oool.
a year paid to heads of departments in Ireland, 60,000/.
was paid to Englishmen and Scotchmen. He believed
that the same disproportion prevailed in the appointment
of inferior officers, and the report sought for would show
whether he was right or wrong. He did not want the
testing 22,000 names, but the Right lion. Gentleman
could give a return of the different clerks and officers,
which would show whether he was right or wrong.
He had bean told that there were not three per cent. of
Irishmen among them. The Right lion. Gentleman
said there was no opportunity of making these returns.
The same reply had been made b:, the Secretary to the
Admiralty to him (Mr. F. French), when he had moved
for a similar return respecting the Navy. He believed
such a return could b made, and that it
would show that of the hundred appointments which
had been made by Lord Haddington, not one had been
given to an Irishman.—(Hear.) lie thought his Hon.
Friend was entitled to the return, and he regretted the
refusal of the Government.

Mr. HUME felt reluctantly obliged to oppose the
notion. Everything that tended to keep up the na-
tional distinctions between England, Ireland, and Scot-
land, was wrong, and on that ground he opposed the
motion. The return with respect to naval officers would
lead to most unjust and unfair inferences. It was not
the disposition of the Irish to go to sea, and conse-
quently, the proportion of Irish naval officers was
small as compared with Englishmen and Scotchmen.
He thought the motion would be attended with un-
pleasant and bad results, and he trusted, therefore, that
his Right Hon. Friend would withdraw it.
Sir C. NAPIER said, that in that portion of the ser-
vice with which he was best acquainted, he did not be-
lieve any questions were asked about country. The
question was who had got most interest.—(Laughter.)
He believed the reason why there were not more Irish-
men appointed, was that they had not as much interest
as others. •
After a few words from Mr. WARBURTON,

Mr. V. STUART said that the motion of his Right
Hon. Friend at least showed there was a strong feeling
that Irishmen did not get that fair share of patronage
to which they were entitled. He trusted that, in the
future distribution of patronage, a fair proportion, not
only of the higher offices, but of the minor appointments,
would fall to Irishmen.—(liear, hear.)
Mr. WYSE having replied, the motion was negatived
without a division.

INCOME-TAX.
Mr. WYSE then moved for a return'of the amount of
Irish income which is assessed to the property-tax i“

Great Britain, distinguishing the amount charged under
each schedule. lie should not go into any details, but
simply move for the return.
Sir R. PEEL said that the papers already printed
stated that there were no returns which would enable the
Commissioners to furnish the information required.
Mr. IVYSE under those circumstances would with-
draw the motion.

ANATOMY ACT.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND moved for an address
to her Majesty, praying that she will be graciously
pleased to lay before this House, a copy of all Commis-
sions, with the names of the ommissioners, appointed
to inquire into the working of the Anatomy Act, and
also into the official conduct of any inspector or in-
spectors of schools of anatomy for England, Scotland, anti
Wales ; with the dates of each Commission, and reports
(if any) of evidence taken by the said Coirunissioners.
Mr. P. BORTH WICK seconded the motion.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that this was a subject not only
of great delicacy, but, as it appeared to him, unsuited to
discussion in a popular assembly. With respect to the
Anatomy Act, his experience in the office of the Home
Department had confirmed bins in his opinion of the
successful working of the measure. Indeed, its quiet
and silent operation was the best test of its
usefulness. He would remind the Honourable
Gentleman, that previous to the enactment of
that measure, there was hardly a churchyard within a
hundred miles of the metropolis, where the sanctity of
the grave was not violated, and the state of the church-
yard was such as to render human life in the neighbour-
hood quite insecure. He had had a quarterly return
made to him, which it was his duty to inspect, and, like
all his predecessors, he could answer for its accuracy.
Some irregularities had from time to time been brought
under the notice of the Secretary of State. Commis-
sions of inquiry had ben issued, evidence had been
taken ; reports had in some instances been made,
in others it had been thought better to confine the
information to the Secretary of State. If any
subject could with profit be left to the Government, this
could. He did not ask for a blind confidence ; but
it was notorious that the evils which this Act
of Parliament was passed to remedy had disap-
peared. The schools of anatomy were sufficiently and
regularly supplied ; all outrages on public decency were
avoided ; and it was his opinion that the greatest
possible inconvenience would arise from the pro-
duction of the reports to which the lion.
Gentleman's motion was directed ; and he hoped, there-
fore, that the House would support him in refusing the
Hon. Gentleman's motion.
Mr. FRENCH said, that when he brought forward
a motion on this subject some years ago, he
was met by a statement that it was under the considera-
tion of the Commissioners. If they had maintained the
delicacy which the Right Hon. Gentleman wished them
to maintain, they would not have procured the retire-
ment of Dr. Sullvaan.—(Hear, hear.) The Right
Hon. Baronet had affixed the epithet " noxious agita-
tion" to a motion brought forward by a supporter of the
Government.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM—I did not use the words.
Mr. F. FRENCH said;there never was a more ill-used
man in the country than Mr. Roberts. The most emi-
nent scientific men in the country had borne testimony
to the merits of that gentleman.
Mr. WARBURTON agreed with the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet that nothing could be more injurious
than this species of noxious agitation. Of the way
in which the Honourable Alderman (Copeland) had
brought the subject before the House there was little to
complain. One expression, only, should he (Mr. War-
burton) comment upon. In speaking of the conduct of
the late inspector, Dr. Sullivan, the worthy Alderman
had said he had been permitted to retire on receiving the
the sum of one hundred pounds. Having investigated
every charge brought against him, he (Mr. Warburton)
could declare, upon his honour—and he believed every
Commissioner concurred in the opinion— that Dr. Sul-
livan's conduct had been conducive to the public interest,
and that throughout every circumstance he had con
ducted himself well. He (Mr. Warburton) also knew
he had not been permitted to retire, but that he had been
dismissed from his office with a gift of one hundred
pounds. He believed that Dr. Sullivan had received a
complete and honourable acquittal from every charge
brought against him.
Sir J. GRAHAM said the fact was there had been a
second Committee, and the report of that Committee
had been in favour of Dr. Sullivan.
Mr. P. BORTIIWICK said this subject was certainly
not one peculiarly adapted for popular discussion ; but
he had felt it his duty to present to the House the peti-
tion which had been entrusted to him ; and every
petition, properly worded, sent to him, he should
consider it his duty to present in like manner.
The agitation that had been alluded to had been shared
in by some of the first men in the medical profession—
Sir Astley Cooper, Sir Benjamin Brodie, Dr. Birk-
beck, and others. Unless the evils which the petition
he had presented complained of were remedied, it would
be his duty, at a subsequent period, to call the attention
of the House to the subject of those complaints. It was
in the power of the Home-office to rectify those com-
plaints, and he would rather it should be done there
than by public discussion in that House. If he were
compelled to bring it forward it would be contrary to
his own inclination.

Mr. WARBURTON asked the llon. Gentleman if he
intended to raise a discussion on that petition or not.
He had repeatedly attended in expectation of a dis-
cussion, and it had repeatedly been postponed.
Mr. BORTHWICK—It had only been postponed
once. • He trusted it would be unnecessary to bring it on
at all, if the question were taken up by the Home
Secretary.
Mr. MACKINNON thought they were bound to take
the word of the Secretary of State. They must see the
impossibility in which the House was placed with res-
pect to forming an opinion on the subject.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND, in reply, complained
that the returns which the House had ordered on this
subject some years since had not yet been made. He
desired to know if the Commission of which the Hon.
Member for Kecdal was a member had yet made their
report to the Home Secretary ? If they had not, it was
the duty of the Government to insist on that report being
made. The Hon. Member for Kendal stood in a peculiar
position with regard to the Commission. He was one of
the principal persons connected with University College,
and it could be shown that the Act had been worked to
the advantage of that establishment, therefore the Go-
vernment ought to call immediately for that report. He
thanked the House for the attention with which they had
heard him, and would beg to withdraw his motion.

Motion withdrawn.
OPENING OF CATHEDRALS TO THE PUBLIC.
Mr. HUME then moved the following resolution:—
" That this House, taking into consideration the exem
plary conduct of the people during the exhibition of the
Cartoons last year, and wherever they have been ad-
mitted to public edifices, and their general disposition to
improve by the contemplation of works of art, approve
of the following recommendation of the Select Com-
mittee of this House on National Monuments, inlB4l
:
That your Committee strongly deprecate any course
which could create an impression that churches were at
any time to be considered merely in the light of places
for the exhibition of works of art; but it is their opinion
that as, by increased facilities of admission to the inspec-
tion of mere woeks of art, civilisation has been encou-
raged and public taste improved, so a more free admis-
sion to religious edifices, under proper regulation, may
be made conducive, not merely to the gratification of cu-
riosity and the acquirement of historical knowledge, but
to the growth and progress of religious impressions, by
leading the mind of the spectator from the contempla-
tion of the building to a consideration of the views
with which, and the purposes for which, it
was origin4lly erected, and is still maintained.
Your Committee entertain a hope that arrangements
may be made by the cathedral authorities, to allow the
larger portions of Westminster Abbey, and of St. Paul's
and other cathedrals throughout the country, to be open
freely to the public daily, and especially on Sundays,
reconciling such free admission with the due and undis-
turbed performance of religious services, though it may
be required to continue a small reduced fee, or other
sufficient restriction, in regard to the chapels and smaller
or more intricate portions of those edifices. Your Com-
mittee think it right to add, that if the greater freedom
of admission to those churches should lead, as it pro-
bably must, to an increase bf the number of officers
employed in their superintendence, the additional expense
ought to be defrayed from other funds than those
belonging to the cathedrals.' " In bringing forward
this motion, he hoped be should be introducing a
more agreeable subject to the notice of the House
than the working of the Anatomy Act.—(Cheers.)
The improvement of the people was the great object
which he had in view, and the mode of effectin., that
improvement was to make use of the means which the
country possessed to enable them to produce an impres •
sion on the minds of the people which language could
not convey. Some years ago there was an opinion pre-
vailing that museums and collections of art could only
be studied by the rich—that the middle and lower classes
were too mischievous to be trusted to view them. A
great change had, however, taken place within the last
ten years in the national character, and Englishmen of
all classes could now be trusted to view and to study
valuable works of art without any danger to the objects
of their study.—(Cheers.) The boon which had been
conceded to the middle and working classes by the
Directors of the British Museum and the National Gal-
lery had been acknowledged with gratitude, and had
been looked upon as an advantage. A marked benefit
had been derived from the manner in which these insti-
tutions had been thrown open. The Commissioners of
Police bore testimony to the marked improvement which
had taken place in the manners of the people, and they
attributed it to their increased sobriety, and to the
means which the lower orders now had, in their leisure
hours, of improving their minds, by contemplating works
of art. In answer to the question, as to how far, in their
opinion, it would be safe to admit the public to West-
minster Abbey, the Commissioners stated that they could
with confidence depend that good order would be pre-
served by the masses, if they were admitted there, and
that they felt convinced that the people would
do all in their power to protect and preserve the
building and everything contained in it.—(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member then quoted the opinions of Mr.
Addison in the " Spectator,' in support of free admission
to public buildings, as caculated to elevate the national
taste and the national morals. The Queen, soon after
her ascent to the throne, commanded the Secretary of
State for the Home Department, the Noble Lord the
Member for the City of London, to endeavour, by every
means in his power, to open the cathedrals to the public.
The Noble Lord wrote, in conformity with her Majesty's
wishes, to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, and to
the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's, but he was sorry to
say these dignitaries did not carry into practical effect
her Majesty's wishes. The cathedrals were public
buildings. The Deans and Chapters had only a life in-
terest in them ; and they should not be suffered to dis-
figure the noble and costly architecture of these edifices
by placing unsightly monuments- in them. The monu-
ments of naval and military heroes—men only famous

Teed
from deeds of warfare and blood—should ncit std
ght
to pollute the temple of peace. The Governmeinte.all
to prevent these abominations, for such he would
them.—(Hear, hear.) He would remove all such nit
agreed num?nts from these buildings. lie entirely
the opinion of Mr. Addison, that free adiniss,':.
to works of art would greatly tend to
.1,4
prove the public taste. It had been urged
the
indiscriminate admission might prove injurious to.
preservation of these edifices ; but if they consulted. theea
opinions of many eminent men who had been examined
before a Committee of that House, they would finel,„;_t,
such danger need not be apprehended. Sir John Dead
ton said, the conduct of the public in public places
vastly improved within the last few years, "so much!" ,
said Sir John, " that had I been fifty years ago in
foreign country, and on my return witnessed the con°
of the lower classes in public buildings, I would not here
10
believed that they belonged to the same nation, or Wel_
the same class of people at all." The only unseetalY
conduct Sir John Britton said he had noticed was th,
of the vergers, and such functionaries demand'fili
money. Mr. Cunningham, the author of "Lives s
British Artists," and other works of importance, was.
in
'
favour of free admission to public buildings. iie
er
said, that those men usually called " the mob
operatives—as far as he knew, generally conduct
themselves in these places with great decorum.;
(Cheers.) Mr. Edward R. Bray, the historian of Wes
minster Abbey, bore similar testimony. It should beret':
collected that 45,2001. of the public money had beoe,
voted by Parliament in the years 1807, 1808, t„
1810, and 1811, towards the improvement of vle:fe.
minster Abbey, and those buildings about it. He (. ~,5
Hume) had received communications from the nis"°l",
of Wells, Winchester, and Norwich, and all these PS
lates were in favour of public admission to public Loyd
ings, subject of course to proper restrictions. 1.!.9
Melbourne had told him (Mr. Hume) that, when a °°3o;.'
at Westminster, there was only a charge of twopene.egee
threepence to the chapel—all other parts of the etlb,
were then open to the public. After some further ?
servations the Hon. Member concluded by entreating
the House to pass the resolution.—(Cheers.) 0
Mr. WYSE seconded the motion, and, in doing ,t;
said he thought that his Horn Friend, the Member 11_
Montrose, was deserving of the highest praise for the
perseverance and intelligence which he had flown J.,
bringing the subject before the House. He (Mr.WYs°o;
notiie
thought it was a reproach to the country at large
allow the population to have free access to all our pubihe
works of art, and public monuments. He thought t„„
time was now come when that prohibition should be "";
moved. Let the House for one moment look at the e°"
duct of the immense number of persons who witnessed
the exhibition of the cartoons last year. Thousenie
upon thousands visited that exhibition without a sing,
scratch occurring to any picture. Cheap catalogues we'et
published, and fifty thousand were sold in a very shlo
time ; and it was interesting to know that mast
purchased these cheap catalogues were induced to turfof
chase the higher priced catalogues, for the purpose „0
obtaining more information with respect to the p1c,,,.;
than was obtained in the cheap books. Tranqin.l'l4
and peace pervaded that exhibition, but, above all, Me,
was improvement for the people. If such a feeling "'„'",
shown by the people last year on the occasion of the rs,
w iti
hibition of the cartoons, why should that feeling be
trusted now with respect to the public exhibition of oie
monuments and works of art ? Look at the exollPre
of Bavaria and Poland, where the public monuments we s
opened without the least restriction. It was useleSe
to think of encouraging an art, unless they at the 10
time endeavoured to cultivate a taste for it in the 'ninth°
of the people. What was more likely to exalt
English character still higher, than placing constantly
before the eyes of the people the history of their country
What better means could be found of placing that histi'„g
constantly before their eyes than this, of freely openlif
our public monuments and works of art? He sincere:,
wished that the Government would follow the noble e'e
ample which had been set them in this respect by Frareche'
and it was with this view that he cordially supporta'
motion of his Hon. Friend.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said he should oppose the moti011;
He thought there would be very little difference betWefo
the debates of preceding years, upon this subject, and this
debate of that night. The only difference was, that to,
year the motion was brought forward in April, where rd
in former years it had generally been brought forW!';
in July or August. He feared that in opPosl°-
the motion he would have to use the same PP;
ments which had been used from year to YAeis,
on this subject, and that nothing new would be
.„`"0
covered in what he had to say. The Hon. Gentle"-00
who had brought forward this motion had done so
eti
the ground that cathedrals were national property, 6
ld
that by opening them freely to the public, means w. 110:
be afforded of promoting not merely the intellectual 0
joyments of the people, but also of strengthening tlebo
religious principles. In the first place, how did oi
Hon. Gentleman make out that cathedrals were natin.oo;
property? They had not been endowed by the nail
and with the single exception of St. Paul's, not one '
been built by the nation.
Mr. HUME—They were given by Parliament. test
Sir R. INGLIS thought the utmost that the greili,"ol
latitudinarian had ever contended for was, that they
been transferred, but this he (Sir R. H. Inglis) was to
pared to deny. At the time of the reformation,
cathedrals belonged to the clergy, and when that dela
changed their faith, the cathedrals went with them, tha
were still retained by them as their property. If ibe
Hon. Gentleman could by any means show that ,
opening of the cathedrals would be the means of el0d
lightening the people, then he (Sir R. H. Inglis) weetibo
be willing to admit that it would be competent for cod
Government to consider, looking to vested interests sbbo
the rights of property, how far the proposition of ''o
t,
Ilonourable Gentleman could be carried I'o
He (Sir R. H. Ingas) did not believe ",0,
there was a necessary connection between aid
tellectual and moral excellence, and, therefore, like the
not feel called upon to support this motion. Al'bel
brightest period of the intellectual world, they lid
found that there existed the greatest masses of I)°, of
and private corruption. Many were the instance'ry
great taste being connected with great personal deP to
vity ; and for these reasons he was satisfied thsho
make the people skilful judges of statuary and paintitho
was not the soundest mode of enlightening them in
doctrines of Christianity. He was, however, still c 40- •
prepared to assent to the second part of the Hon. u
il
denim's proposition. The Hon. Gentleman reluctqo
admitted that it was necessary to have come adrelssiiir
fee, in order to maintain the necessary officers. Ile `be•
R. H. Inglis) would not enter into the question of W to
ther sixpence was a high charge or not for admissif;co
i
Westminster Abbey, but this he would say, that s filf,
a very small sum compared with what it was fornle'ol
It was evident that some funds would be requires:l9.of
there were but two modes of raising those funds, e' the
by means of a small fee for admission, or by paying tit
necessary officers out of the taxes. He believed thsfitba
was not suggested that the funds should come out °!iog
ecclesiastical revenues; and of the two modes of reishis
those funds which he had mentioned, the best, it',osB
belief, was by imposing a small admission-fee on ti.loal
who were the recipients of the advantages to be
~,dentle
from, witnessing our works of art. The Hon. txe"hot
man attached great importance to those advantages, rest
he (Sir R. 11. Inglis) did not think they were so gsia
as they had been represented. The Hon. Gentle-00'
(Mr. Hume) expressed a wish that what he called in ood
gruous monuments should be removed from St. Paul usiocl
Westminster Abbey. To a great extent he sympati"
with that, feeling; he was one of those who coill“.0,011
regard without horror the mixture of allegorY, 009
truth, the introduction of heathen gods and godocoott
into places of religious worship ; and he would he "'e'
to see monuments which were open to this objection no
moved. In the case of St. Paul's especially, whierethAt
one of the monuments objected to on this grouno,seir •
contained representations of Mars, Bellona, or be
tune, covered the remains of the deceased perslitli
could see no impropriety in the proposed removal,. „flei°
respect to the monument to James Watt by Sir Yr- ae
Chantrey, he would venture to say that there 011' re
person having the smallest pretension t° tbst
ligious feeling, who would not consider nre•
that monument was utterly misplaced. He was in'!4es'
pared to deny that there was great value in the sultoni
tion that it might be very convenient to removesrest'
many of our public edifices, and especially from on'
minster Abbey and St. Paul's, those incongruous r° l 0
ments which had been placed in them within thootio.
century and a half.--(Hear, heal.) The Hon. o,eogbt
man had made another suggestion, which he t`gofs)
was well worthy of his Right lion. Friend (Sir lie; ,41st
consideration, It was that of forming in Englanlcoe
had long existed in France, a commission to tithe ebe
of national monuments. In his opinion it would There
sirable, if possible, to include other objects. „ Stone
could be no doubt whatever that the owner or h'stoes
henge might, if he chose, destroy the relics whie"ociir
there.—(Hear, hear.) No law proceeding 1001 etion'
issue from any Court would prevent their destrtl„-orr
He ventured to hepe, from the character of his c°"„. re'
men, that the chances of such an event were it" Its:
mote ; but it would be recollected that withillf,t7ooo,ll
twenty-five years, one of the Logan stones in `-' hft;s
had actually been removed, although the party Whoret '
it removed had been subsequently induced to re:, eon°
to its former place. Differing, as he had the lois „lte
generally to do from the Ilon. Gentleman opP°"-coty
this subject,. he had thought it right, whentheijons,f;
agree with him,.to state that agreement to We 0001,
lie trusted that the suggestions which had bee:thong,
would not be neglected by his Right Hon. FrienThot
at the same time he felt' bound to resist the 112°' 0
fore the House.
nonrs..a.
Mr. M. MILNES would not follow the ki,f) d intro
Baronet through the various topics which he 11," 000°0
duced into his speech. There was nothing in tues 0010
which required that he should do so. There Wsea tto
phrase in this resolution which in any way racy wet
question whether cathedrals were or were not 0101
the control of the State; still less was there s" ipte
in it which favoured the opinion that moral °lee N°
re
motives and principles were in any drgrproPf.so
important than religious.—(Hear, hear.) eoln7ho
before the House was simply that they should t of
what had already been confirmed by the reP,e i4ornbe •
Committee, by the implied consent of the Noble by
the head of her Majesty's late Government, vie 's;
unwearied support which had been given to Bair bear")
„,)
stated in the resolution by the Right lion. P.a'r, hesoirs
the head of the present Government.—(ll("the dud
fees at
to 0110
Now, on the subject of receiving
of cathedral churches, he was opposed vice. ,ecl
for whose opinions he had the greatest re r..egafit4s
declared, with unfeigned earnestness, that
hehurch `'on
the reception of any fee at the door of a ecrpositlos
gross desecration.—(Hear, hear, from the toeW
benches.) The Hon. Baronet (Sir H. for
well as he did that these buildings were ralistcthe r 05553
si,
higher purposes; and to exclude people front as to
ble participation in those purposes was, as 00_0,
ble, to nullify the objects of their founders, co?,
render these edifices, which were the pride of o!.1,
try, morally and religiously useless.—(Hear, h..eanieloo
was service performed va them every day, u

eft.

ter

fiJI
1:110r1
to ri
sion
be g
eon,

BOA
t 00(
Rou

Wed
sht—
olfb 11
Jos
a.-i 4 ,
Jch
-reed