The Sun.
London, England, 1828-02-27 00:00:00

cretary for the Home Department. That Right lion.
Gentleman states what in a legislative capacity I lien not
- prepared to admit—namely, that there is a difference be-
tween a Minister who is a Member of Parliament, and an
ordinary Member of Parliament. " said he, " am
A Member of Parliament, and responsible Minister of the
Crown ; whereas you gentlemen opposite are called upon to
act in your simple individual capacity, and therefore it is not
at all proper for me to do in niy double capacity what it is for
you to do in your single one." Some months ago I sat upon that
side of the House on which the Right Hon. gentleman
site, hut I do not contend that either I or the friends who
surround me are entitled to alter our opinions and course
of conduct without our altered position in the Mies,
This doctrine is to me, Sir, quite unintelligible, but if it
be intelligible, and if it' be constitutional, it would enable
me to join with thiese political reformers, to whom I have
sometimes been opposed, and of whom the late Major
Cartwright may be considered as the outward and visible
head. Those pure' reformers contended that the Mini-
sters of the Crown ought not to have seats in this House
at all ; but I contended against the Major that they did
not sit here as Ministers of the Crown ; they lost
their characters of servants of the Crown, whenever
they entered this House, and sat here only as the
Representatives of the people. This is my argument.
The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite does not merely find
it.necessary to seek assistance in defending his cause ;—he
is himself a sufficiently doughty combatant not to make it
necessary that he should call that other and more doughty
combatant, the worthy Baronet, to his aid, whom I heard
with as little effect as human nature would permit, not, as
he said, with a sneer, but with good humour, merriment,
and a very moderate share of conviction. The arguments
cf the Right Hon. Gentleman have all been put forward
under the protection of the Hon. Baronet ; he has fol-
lowed him into the field, saying, Thou shalt be My shield
and my Knight, and I will fight in thy train.—(A laugh.)
Secretary Peel intimated across the table that he
had not followed the arguments of the Hon. Baronet.]--
To me, Sir, it seems that the view of the Sacrament
taken by the Right Honourable Gentleman, so worthy
of notice, is one that he has been reminded of,
and which he willingly and joyfully adopted, by the
champion at his side. We are first told, Sir, by the
Right Hon. Secretary, that it was proper to allot to the
Dissenters the least degree of infliction, the least degree
of exclusion, which was consistent with the safety and
security of the Established Church.' Bat what, Sir, is
the Worthy Baronet's ides of the minimum of infliction
anti exclusion? Why, Sir, it is a total exclusion front
ail places of profit, trust, and honour. The Hon. Baronet
—who, I believe, enjoys some place of r rofit—with the
other holders of offices of profit, looks down from the
heights of place, trust, and emoluments:, on Dissenters,
and they have discovered that the minimum of penalties
they can inflict, the least conceivable exclusion, is to pre-
vent them ever enjoying any emoluments, any places of
trust or profit, from which they as members of the Estab-
hefted Church have a sole right.—(A laugh.)—The
Honourable Baronet said lie did not like those who spoke
slightingly on the Established Church, or of institutions
of ancient times ; and as I heard the Hon. Baronet, he
spoke with reverence for the wisdom of our ancestors ;
but the ridicule thrown on that phraseology is not of
modern date, nor of modern invention. It has not been
condemned in a spirit of mirth, hut in phrases as measured
as the phrase itself, anti was disparaged long before the
Test and Corporation Acts were enacted and put in
force, it was not disparaged by ridicule, but by sound
argument. The Honourable Baronet says he is not dis-
posed to object to improvements in the arts and sciences,
though he would have us adhere to the wisdom of our ances-
tors in politics; but the person who first disparaged that
maxim, which he would apply to political and moral sub-
jects—and I mention this that he may view that maxim
with a mitigated respect—was a Lord High Chancellor of
this kingdom. Ile was a great man who first threw
doubts on the phrase, the wisdom of our ancestors. His
name may, perhaps, he immaterial to the Hon. Baronet ;
but it was a man of the name of Bacon who first stamped,
ieot with the seal of ridicule, but with the evidence of truth,
the objections he made and irrefragably urged, to the eternal
repetition of the phrase, that we were to seek for wisdom
in times that were far off, and not in those that were
near ; and lie is an authority who would fight our pur-
poses. He said of the wisdom of our ancestors, or rather
of the experience of past ages, that, if it was not a con-
tradiction, it was the grossest abuse of language. That
those who went before, instead of being elder and wiser,
had lees experience than we had ; that then was the youth
of the world, anti the present time its old age—when our
eoung men knew more than the sages of old times. The
Right Hon. Gentleman and the Hon. Baronet should
look into these things before they attempted to justify ap-
plying the sacrament and tests by their veneration for the
wisdom of our ancestors, though he must congratulate
both the Right Hon. Gentleman and the Hon. Member,
on their veneration for these disqualifying Acts of Parlia-
ment, fin- preventing persons from taking office, unless
they conformed, as the lion. Baronet said, in all things.
I do not find this, Sir, in the Act of Uniformity. God
forbid, indeed, that I should attempt to say what is not
in the Statute-book ; but at least I can say I did look at
the Index, I did look into the Rnhrick, I did look into
the Canons of the Church of 1603, but I could not find,
except in them, that uniformity is enforced; hut as those
Canons were never confirmed by Act of Parliament, they
were without authority. The Act of Uniformity did not
,require uniformity, unless in ease the party accepted office.
But perhaps the provision the Hon. Bart. alludes to may
he found in another Act. The only uniformity I can find
which is required, is a uniformity in prayers, when per-
formed by a minister of the church, and that he should ad-
minister the sacraments; but, with that spirit of contra-
diction i7hich unfortunately runs through our Penal Sta-
tutes, it is required that the Parson, Vicar, or Citrate
shall read prayers once a month, and perform both sa-
crament.. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper he might
perform, and thus fulfil the regulation; hut the other
Sacrament, to be administered at the exigence of death,
could not be performed once a month. (Hear, and a laugh.)
That there are any other Statutes which require this uni-
formity I must deny. I find that our Keepers of Chaees,
our Park Keepers, our Keepers of Warrens, and other
similar illustrious officers, cannot take office unless they
qualify themselves by conforming ; but I will venture to
give relief to the tender consciences of the Hon. Bart. and
the Right Hon. Gentleman, and I will tell them that they
Dsay sleep in safety, though they have omitted to conform,
for there is no Statute inflicting a punishment on them_
no penalty demandable if they have not taken the sahra-
ments according to the Church of ilioglajtd, unless they
hold -orne office. The Hon. Baronet approves of im-
provements in the arts and sciences ; Its approves of the
people growing wiser, hut he cannot approve of improve-
metes in morals and in politics—he would have us adhere
to the wisdom of the ancient sages of Greece and Rome,
who knew nothing of a Representative Government —no-
;aling of Juries—nothing of the Unpaid Magistracy—no-
titlng of a Church Establishment, the safety and security
of which was the corner-stone of the Hon. Bart.'s argu-
ment. We have been told, Sir, that imposing the Sacrament
es a test has been long in existence, and we hays-. been
asked what it signifies? This question has been repeated,
Sir, but it has been answered, and the arguments are un.
answerable of my lion. Friend below me, anti of the Hon.
Member who spoke last. What signifies it ? Sir, I say
it signifies every thing. First, Sir, it signifies much to the
Church ; and I speak as a Churchman—as a member of the
Christian Church, founded in the doctrines of the Scrip-
tures, patronised by the State, and confirmed by the law ;
and I would ask every mars—particularly every serious
man, who has ever made religion an object of his contem-
plation, or who valued it a rush—I would ask him whe-
ther or not it is not a very great impropriety—to use no
stronger word— thus to pollute and degrade it? if it is
Tint an indecency, an impiety, thus to make the Seer"
ment a Custom of the Constitution, and a test of office?
It is the most holy rite of our religion—of the purest re-
ligion en earth—of a religion which, of all others, is
most ablitierent to any securities or ties, most alien
from any fleshly purposes, of a peculiar mild character,
and which from its beginning had declared, though
other religions admitted mankind to share with other
Gods, and were connected with their fle,by lusts
and worldly appetite',; yet this religion allowed no
other Gods, and if a luau were a Christian, said his
faith anti his services should be exclusive ; tide religion,
the parent of all religtions, and this rite, the most holy rite
nf this religion, were degraded and polluted by being made
the passports to the place of a common gamekeeper,—
(Hear, hear.) Is not this enough, is not this sufficient to
make us all say that it shall exist no longer ? And what
arguments do the Gentlemen use to support theee measures?
The first they use is that of time. They say thatthereis
no grievance, that what the Churchman can have, that also
the Dissenter can have. But is it not a grievance, ae was
eaid in speaking of the situation of the Catholics, that they
should still shew the mark of the chain, though the
fetters weie knocked off. 'That was, Sir, I bell, vei Mr.
Canning's expression. Assuming for argument t' :it there
i 3 no practical grievance inflicted by these laws- though
that there is none I utterly deny—is the stigma n ,thing?
But this is not the only reason why these lass are a
grievance. I contend, Sir, that they inflict a di! 4. tem-
poral and worldly injury on the Dissenters. The ere ex-
cluded by theselaws from Corporations. No Dies titer can
stand a contest for any place in a Corporation. It Item been

. „ .
said,' that the late Lord Mayor of London was a Dissenter ;
and whim I saw. the Sheriff approach the Right Hon.
Gentleman, 1 felt alarmed, for I have a natural horror of
Sheriffs ; but 1 found he only served the Right Hun. Gen-
tleman with an argument ; but that argument, which was
the statement that the late Lord Mayor was a Dissenter, if
worth anything, is an argument for me, and proves my
case. He being a Dissenter • was only able to hold this
place by taking the Sacrament of the Established Church ;
he was obliged, therefore, to repress his repugnance to
that sacrament before lie could hold his office. And many
Dissenters, Sir, will not take that Sacrament. It may not
signify to members of the Church of England, yet many
of them, like Richard Baxter, may net take that Sacra-
ment ; but I do net believe that one in a thousand of the
Presbyterians will, on any terms, take the Sacrament of
the Church of England. The stern Presbyterians of old
would not go into a church in which there was an organ,
and would on no aecount kneel at an altar. They did net
think the Church of England so very different from the
Church of Rome, that they could leave the one and adhere
to the other. If, they said, you put two eggs on a plate,
one of those eggs is not more like the other than the
Church of England is like the Church of Rome.
might' be groundless, but it shewed their,
_jealousy. If the
Presbyterians disliked the Romish Church on ac-
count of the vestments of the Priesthood, and (lis•
liked altars, and regarded kneeling as an idolatry, can
they like the service of the Church of England ?
The Right Hon. Member for Liverpool may recollect, per-
haps, a contest which recently took place in that town,
and which was one of the most absurd I ever heard of.
Two gentlemen, both of the same party, contested the
office of Mayor, and they spent a large sum of money in
the election ; but if one of these candidates had differed
from the Church of England, so as not to subscribe to the
39 Articles, and refused to take the Test, that would
immediately have ended the contest, and placed his oppo-
nent in the office. So also in London, where a contest has
lately taken place for the place of Alderman of the Vintry
Ward, in which a friend of mine is concerned, and which is
not yet decided ; if it could have been established that either
of the Candidates, from difference about transubstantiation,
or any other matter, lied refused to take the Test, there
would have been an end of the contest, and the King's Bench
would never have heard of the subject. If this is not a real
grievrnci, what is a grievance ? We only know the effect
of the laws as the laws are called into operation, but what
the effects of these laws are in preventing many persons from
entering into contests, in keeping them out of public. life, in
driving them into privacy, we do not know. The Dissen-
ters will not go to seek place; they go elsewhere—go to
their libraries—go into private—lose their appetite for
Government—lose their appetite for our free Constitu-
tion ; and they are doomed to privacy and retirement,
by no fault of theirs, but by laws which may be brought
to operate against them, should they stand a contest
for the public honours their fellow-citizens can bestow.
—(Hear, hear, hear.)—ls this the way to conciliate
their attachment ? Will it make the three millions
of Dissenters now in this kingdom, who must feel and
know it, sad who have shewn that they feel and know it,
contented, and will they, as ignorant as the Right Hon.
Member for Liverpool, ask, what does it signify ? They
feel that wrong is done them ; they ask for the restoration
of their privileges, and not till they are] restored can you ,
boast of the freedom of your Constitution, in Church and
State, the advantages will all be gained by you, for they are
only made more hostile to the Church by the restriction,
and worse subjects. Again, it is said, that after having so
long passed over the matter in silence, they have no reason
to come forward and claim the abolition of these laws ; but
they have not at any time suffered in silence. In 1787,
they brought forward their claims, and in that year, or
1789, I do not exactly recollect which, they were defeated
by so small a majority as 120 to 100, or something of that
kind ; but it is so long since I read that debate, that I can-
not speak precisely. If matters had gone on smoothly, if
the anticipations of Mr. Pitt, in 1790 and 1792, had been
realized-eehad peace been continued through the whole world
and had this country continued to enjoy the blessings of
internal tranquillity, had not that other event occurred
which had injured the prosperity of so many nations and
of France itself, though ultimately tending greatly to her
improvement—if the French Revolution had not taken
place, I may venture to say, that, before now, the Dis-
senters would have been released from the Test and Corpo-
ration Acts, for under the circumstances of that time the
majority of 20 was not a victory, but a defeat. It must not
be forgotten, that, under the benignant influence of •
Right Hon. Secretaries, this system had not gone on for
ages without disturbing the public tranquillity ; for
what were the riots at Birmingham? And had no tests
existed, pointing out one set of men to the animosity
of others, those evils would never have taken place.—
There would have been no means of influencing the passions
of the people, or of causing those outrages which were so
much to be deplored. After this, exasperated feelings
came into existence, and if the Dissenters failed immedi-
ately to prosecute their claims, it was because they hoped
for a more favourable opportunity, and they ceased to
press them. Subsequent to this delay, the Catholic
Question began to agitate the country. In 1787 the Ca-
tholic Question was not stirred—it was brought forward
subsequently, and during the twelve years which elapsed,
the country was carrying on war against France, and all
Europe was agitated by the French Revolution. After the
Catholic Question was brought into Parliament one party
became alarmed.—the country was filled with the contest,
and the Dissenters acted wisely, nay generously, in not pro-
secuting their own claims. This is not an inference ; I
know it for a fact, that from the time Mr. Fox introduced
his measure into the Commons, and Lord Grenville his
measure into the Lords, relative to the Catholics, the Dis-
senters abstained from pressing their own claims for
fear of injuring the cause of the Catholics. This
showed their great good sense ; and now, when the
time is favourable, they again come forward and pro-
secute their claims. The Right. Hon. Gentleman does
not think the Petitions are spontaneously sent to the
House, and he says, if I could think they were, I would
—what does the House think—remove their grievance?
No. Think it was time to inquire if any grievance
existed. This is very illogical. My Noble Friend pro-
ceeds on a different principle. He says the petitions
are a proof of the grievance ; do not, therefore, stop to
inquire if it exists, but inquire into the means of re-
medying it. But if these Dissenters have been influ-
enced to send in petitions, are there not in every parish
in the Kingdom, Clergymen and other persons who have
an interest in opposing the Dissenters, but where are
their petitions? The Dissenters have petitioned,
which shows they feel the grievance which the Right
Honourable Gentleman cannot see ; but the Clergy
of the Established Church and the friends of
that Clergy have not petitioned, whence it is to be
concluded that they see no danger, and are under no ap-
prehension from what the Dissenters claim. Sir, I de-
rive the greatest consolation from this circumstance, be-
cause I now speak in the hearing of a very large body
of the Representatives of the people of this country, and
it enables me to impress upon them this fact, that where-
as a very large portion of their worthy, influential, and
able constituents are Dissenters, it is quite clear that they
may do their duty to those individuals, that they may
I support the cause of civil and religious liberty, and
that they may agree to my Noble Friend's motion
to send the Acts in question to a Committee, with-
out giving any material, or, indeed, without giving
any 'offence to the rest of their constituents. We have,
heard much to-night of the authority of great names.
The Right Honourable Secretary of State for the HoMe
Department has said that the present is not like the
Catholic Question, where all the great ;tames are ranged
on one aide. Sir, we have the names of Fox, and Chat-
ham, and Walpole, with us. Mr. Pitt is certainly an ex-
ception ;—I mean in his conduct in this House. • But in
his letters—and I heartily thank the publisher of those let-
ters for the good they have done to the cause, which, in-
deed, it is evident he intended to support; the cause of
the Catholics—(a laugh)—in his letters Mr. Pitt expresses
a distinct and unequivocal opinion in favour of the repealof
the Test and Corporation Acts. With respect to combining
the cause of the Dissenters with the cause of the Catho-
lics, I, for one, am anxious that they should be kept sepa-
rate. The sense and the feeling of the leaders of the Ca-
tholics lead them to he unanimous in separating the two
questions, and keeping them apart. They say that whe-
ther it will serve the Dissenters to adopt this course they
do not know ; but that theyairebe
sure it solci,l.l serveSttt tthoeCa-
tholic?. That is also my humble
pro-
ceed with the authorities. There is Burke, who was on
his own statement decidedly in favour of the repeal of
civil disabilities under which the Dissenters la-
bour. It was only the fears generated in him by
the French Revolution iwhich prevented bins from ex-
pressing that opinion. The same apprehension operated
on Mr. Burke's sentiments respecting the Slave Trade. An
Hen. Gentleman, not now possessing a seat in this House
—would to God that he were here; for we should have
the weight of his judgment as well as the influence of his
feelings in our favour ;—I mean Mr. Wilberforce—told nue
that Mr. Burke avowed to him that he had once been very
friendly to the abolition of the Slave Trade; but that he
had ceased to be so, because he became satisfied " that it
was all a shred of the accursed web of Jacobinisni." To
say that much respect is due to the opinion of a man,
however great in other respects, who viewed a question in-
volving the rights and privileges of three millions of his

fellow-subjects through the distorted medium of the passion
r•hich the consideration of one overwhelming event--the
French Revolution—always excited in his mind, would be
merely an affectation of candour. Then, Sir, there was
Mr. Windham ; who, although he agreed with Mr. Burke
in many of his extravagant doctrines respecting the French
Revolution, yet was throughoUt his life friendly to the
Repeal of these obnoxious Acts. Even considered on
the ground of authority, therefore, I am justified in
considering that the question comes well recommended to
the House. But then there is Mr. Canning. Sir, I must
ever regret, for two reasons, that Mr. Canning ever made
the declaration which he did make, unfavourable to the
object of my Noble Friend. In the first place, I regret it
on his own account, because I think that it was a very
rash and a very ill-advised declaration, and calculated to he
injurious to his personal character ; in the second place, I
regret it----not on account of the question, because to that,
proceeding as the declaration did on a total misinformation
with regard to the facts, it can do no harm—but on acoonnt
of the injury it is calculated to inflict on those liberal prin-
ciples of which Mr. Canning, during the latter part of his
life, was the usual asserter and patron, by throwing some
discredit on the soundness of judgment on general subjects
of a large and important body of Statesmen. Much, Sir,
as I respect the memory of Mr. Canning, still, as I
cannot give any weight to the authority of Mr. Burke,
viewing every thing, as he did, through the distorted
medium of one engrossing subject, so I cannot give any
weight to the authority of Mr. Canning, labouring, as
he evidently did, under a most complete misconcep-
tion, with reference to the whole of this question. The
very words used by Mr. Canning—" As there is no
practical grievance" abnndantly prove this. Mr. Can-
ning never knew that persons dissenting from the Church
of England might be kept out of Corporations ; that
they were liable to undergo a second election after having
been unanimously chosen for an office in the first in-
stance. If Mr. Canning had known all this, he would
have revolted from considering the Annual Indemnity Act
a cure for the grievance. Sir, that Bill is the last matter,
on which I beg leave to trouble yon with a few words. As
long as the Dissenters were hostile to the existing Govern-
ment, so long it might be necessary to retain the Corpo-
ration and Test Acts for the protection of the Restored
Family. But, Sir, we have for eighty-five years past bad
the best possible proof that all such danger was felt to be
at an end. Year after year such has been the confidence
of Parliament in the Dissenters, that the Annual In-
demnity Bill was passed without opposition in the House,
and without exciting the slightest alarm in the country.
Why not then pass a perpetual Indemnity Bill, now that
you find an annual Indemnity Bill is not sufficient for the
purpose in view ? Sir, the sum and substance of the
whole argument seems to be this : —We are told that little
remains to he done for the Dissenters. Our answer is,—
why then not (lo that little ? In proportion to the little
which they have to ask, is the little which you are
called upon to give. Be influenced by the duty which you
owe to the Dissenters ; but above all, be influenced by the
respect which you owe to the rights and ordinances of your
own church, obviously profaned by those very Acts which
were passed to support them. Nor is that profanation rare.
In one not very distant Corporation which I could name,
above 60 of those outrages take place annually ; nay, a par-
ticular church is set apart for that subject, in order that
the Common Council of the Corporation may there qualify.
It is a mockery, under such circumstances, to say that a
great grievance does not exist. Such an assertion is utterly
repugnant to truth and to common sense. Let any one
'telly the fact ; let any one deny the law ; let any one
contend that evil is ideal; and I will answer him by refer-
ring to the seventeen hundred petitions to which I implore
the attention of the House.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON opposed the motion, on the
ground that the disabilities under which the Dissenters
had laboured were practically repealed. If any grievance
remained, it was so slight, that he would certainly re-
commend Parliament to strike off the fetters of the Ca-
tholic before they deal with this minor evil.
The House then divided—
For the Alotion 237
Against it... 193
• Majority —44
The result of the division when ascertained in the House
was received with loud and continued cheering.
The Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and at
a Quarter before Two o'Clock this morning the House ad-
journed.

FASHIONABLE AND MISCELLANEOUS.

The Duchess of KENT visited the Duchess of
CLAR.ENCE yesterday, at her residence in the Admiralty.

The LORD MAYOR waited upon the Duke of
CPARENCE at the Admiralty yesterday, and had an inter-
view with his Royal Highness.
The Prince and Princess of HOIIENLOIIE-
LAuGENBouRG left the residence of Prince LEOEOLD at
Claremont about eleven o'clock on Monday morning, to
proceed through Dartford to Dover, where their High-
nesses would embark for the Continent. The Prince and
Princess will, it is expected, stay a few days at Ghent, on
a visit to a relation of the Prince, and from thence proceed
to the residence of his Serene Highness near Frankfort.

Letters have been received in town from the
Duke of CAMBRIDGF, at Hanover, dated the 15th instant,
at which time his Royal Highness, we are happy to state,
was in the enjoyment of excellent health.

Mr. STRATFORD CANNING, our Ambas-
cadet to the Sublime PoRTE, arrived at the Foreign Office,
in Downing-street, about half-past eleven o'clock
yesterday morning, in a post-chaise and four, from Sit-
tingbourne, Kent, where the Right Hon. Gentleman had
arrived the preceding night, on his return from Constan-
tinople. Mr. CANNING, after quitting Constantinople,
proceeded to Corfu, from which island he embarked in one
of his Majesty's frigates, and sailed to Ancona, where, after
performing quarantine for six days, Mr. CANNING was
allowed to land on the 13th instant, and immediately set off
for Paris, which city the Right Hon. Gentleman reached
on the 24th instant. On leaving Paris, Mr. CANNING
travelled by way of Calais, where he arrived about five
o'clock on Monday afternoon. After crossing the Channel
to Dover the same afternoon, Mr. CANNING proceeded as
far as Sittingbourne in Kent, where he slept, and left early
yesterday morning for London. Mrs. STRATFORD CAN-
NING did not accompany Mr. CANNING from Ancona, but
WWI to follow the Right Hon. Gentleman by easy stages.
Mr. TURNER, Secretary of Legation to the
British Embassy at Constantinople, and Mr. CANTINI, a
messenger attached to the lonian Government, arrived at
the Foreign-office ahout eight o'clock yesterday morning,
from Sittingbourne, from whence they had been despatched
by Mr. STRATFORD CANNING. Mr. CANTINI landed at
Ancona on the 17th inst., and brought despatches from
Si' FREDERICK ADAM, the Lord High Commissioner of
the lonian Isles. Mr. CANTINI also brought despatches
from Viscount GRANVILLE. our Ambassador at Paris.

Mr. STRATFORD CANNING, on his arrival
in town, proceeded to the residence of Earl DUDLEY, in
Arlington-street, and had an interview with the Noble Earl
for near two hours. On leaving his Lordship, Mr. CAN-
NING visited the Duke of WELLINGTON at the Treasury,
and had a long conference with his Grace. Mr. CANNING
afterwards transacted business for a considerable time at the
Foreign-office.

His MAJESTY received despatches at the
Royal Lodge, in Windsor Park, on Monday night, from
Mr, Secretary PEET.. Despatches also arrived yesterday,
at the Royal Lodge, from Mr. Secretary PEET..
Prince ESTERIIAZY, the Austrian Ambassa-
dor, the Marquis de PALMELLA, the Portuguese Minister,
and Count de MaNnEsr.on, the Wurtemberg Minister,
transacted business with Earl DITDI.EI7 yesterday, at the
office of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

Earl BATHURST, the Earl Of ABERDEEN,
Lord EILLENBOROUG /I, and Viscount STRANG FORD, trans-
acted busiues yesterday at the Foreign Office.

DOVER, FEB. 2G.—Sailed for Calais his
Majesty's steam vessel Echo, wits their Serene Highnesses
the Prince and Princess HOHENLOHE LAUCENEOURG and
suite, under a salute from the batteries. Arrived from
Boulogne the steam packet, Royal George, with his Ex-
yellency the Prince PomartAc, who has proceeded to Lon-
don to resume his duties us Ambassador from France.

LONDON,
WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 27, 1828.

The division of last night on Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S
motion will be ever memorable in the history of this
nation. An interval of eight-and-thirty years had
elapsed since the repeal of the Test and Corporation
Acts last came under the consideration of Parlia-
ment, and the different results at these two different
periods is* a bright omen that the happy time is ap-
proaching when religious distinctions will no longer
constitute grounds for political disabilities, and when
Catholics and Dissenters of all denominations will
have their equal share of the blessings as well as of
the responsibilities of the State.

Did we, however, suspect, with Mr. HusKissoN,
that the triumph of the Dissenters would injure the
Catholic Question, we should view, not the division
of last Right, but the ultimate success of their cause
with regret. Dissenters have their disabilities, their
difficulties to encounter, but these obstacles are not
insurmountable. The Catholics have no way of
evading those which lie in their way, but by swal-
lowing oaths which, nevertheless, are strangely enough
said to be with them no objection on earth.
We are well aware that the Dissenters unfortu-
nately have not made common cause with their fel-
low sufferers, the Catholics, but that many of them
have, on the contrary, expressed decided hostility to
their claims.

It should, however, be borne in mind, that the
repeal of the Test Act will introduce no new Mem-
bers to Parliament, and as those who now sit in that
high assembly are the more enlightened of their body,
we should hope that their own deliverance would
only urge them on to still greater exertions in be-
half of men still excluded from such an invaluable
distinction as the rank and privileges of a British
Citizen.

We need hardly say that the Debate of last night
is worthy of an attentive perusal, but no part of it
is more striking than the exposure of the dreadful
profanation of the Lord's Supper, to secular purposes.
Being decided supporters of the present Adminis-
tration, and having the highest personal respect for
some of its Members, it may appear extraordinary,
that we do not regret the result of a motion, origi-
nating in the Opposition Benches, but which cannot
be regarded as a party question. This course we shall
leave to such of our cotemporaries as may prefer a uni-
form and uninterrupted adulation,to the more valuable,
because more sincere, testimony of those who, though
warm friends, cannot change their opinions at the
beck of power, and who hold that they owe a para-
mount duty to the public, to which the continuance
in office, of any Minister, or set of Ministers, is al-
together subservient. And sincerely do we hope,
that the result of last night's division will deter an
infatuated party in this land from urging on (as
their inclination would lead them) the distinguished
Individual at the head of his Majesty's Go-
Vernment, to make shipwreck of his fame and his
popularity, by opposing himself to those blessings
on behalf of his fellow-subjects, in defence of which,
when foreign nations only were concerned, he has
perilled his life and his reputation in many a well
debated field.

Frankfort Papers and the Allgemeine Zeitung
of the 20th inst. have been received this morn-.
ing, but their contents possess no novelty or im-
portance. The remains of the Egyptian fleet are
said to have arrived at Alexandria on the 3d of
January, and the inhabitants were extremely
struck with its deplorable appearance. There
were onlyßsßixAiti
shii‘pis
pofAwcliA.
ar at Navarin at the dis-
posal of i
The harbour of Cronstadt has lately had a
great addition to its fortifications since the ac-
cession of the Enweror NICHOLAS:--

♦IENNA, FEB. 15.
MetaLitipe,, 90 11-16. Bank Shares, 1,046.

By the French Papers of Sunday and Mon-
day the triumph of the Liberals in the election
of President is confirmed, M. DELALOT being
chosen in place of AL RAvEz.

On Monday se'ennight at Barnardcastle, a
woman, aged 63, engaged to walk 100 miles M 24, hours,
which She completed iu hours.,—eatzdkniian Mercury.