The Sun.
London, England, 1826-04-22 00:00:00

CATHOLIC CLAIMS.

Mr. S. CAREW presented a Petition from the Catholics of
Wexford, praying for Catholic Emancipation..--Laid on the table.
CItEEVEY presented a similar Petition from the Inha-
bitanta of the Parish of St. Audeon, Dublin. He hoped that the
unanimity which at present existed between the two countries
would not be disturbed by the adoption of those measures which
were ingrafted on the Bill of last year relative to Catholic Emanci-
patiOn.—Laid ou the table.
Mr. S. Rtcx presented a Petition, signed by several Protes-
tants; Noblemen and Landholders of Ireland, complaining of the
penal enactments against the Roman Catholics of Ireland, and of
the injury to that country resulting from the Penal Code. They
humbly prayed the House to devise some' remedy against it, and
thereby relieve the country from the difficulty under which it was

labouring.
The Hon. Member also presented a similar Petition from Kil-
kenny, and two other Parishes in Ireland.—The Petitions were
ordered to be printed.
- RATES OF POSTAGE IN IRELAND.

Mr. S. RICE presented a Petition from the Merchants of the
Town of Belfast, complaining of the rates of postage in Ireland.
The letters were charged with Eitglish poitage,, and afterwards
with Irish postage. A letter which would be carried the same.
distance in England, and be charged Is. 4d., was charged es.,'
which was a very serious difference,
Sir .1. NEWPORT supported the Petition; ho held in his
hand a statement of the different sums chtrged for postage in,
Scotland and-Ireland. He found that the postage of a letter, to
the further part of the county of Kerry, was charged 2s. ;
whilst a letter •to thefurther part of Aberdeen, in Scotland (tlw
sante distance) was only charged ls. Bd. Complaints had been
made Session after Session, but no notice had been taken of them,
and he hoped that the House would .do something to cheek this
gross imposition.
• Mr. GOULBUFtNAupported the Petition. He could assure
the Hon. Member that as soon'as the Report of the Post-office
Commission was laid on .the -table, something would be done
to remedy this abuse, which he trustad would be to the satis.:
faction of all parties. Ile did not see any reason for charging
more for the carriage of a letter to Ireland than to• Scotland. Ho
knew, however, for a fact, that the carriage of a letter for 18Q
• miles in Ireland cost as much as the carriage of the same for 400
miles in Scotland. Tie was ready to support any thing that could
be devised to abolish this inequality of chargea.
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON said, he had repeatedly called the at-
tention of the Post-office Commission to the subject, but had never
received any satisfactory answer. He hoped the subject would
be attended to during the summer.
Sir JOHN BRYDGES said, as one of the Members from the
North of Ireland, he rose to bear testimony to the truth of the
allegations of the Petition, setting forth the grievances ; and he
was happy to hear from the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland,
that the matter would speedily be investigated,Und a remedy ap-
plied.
After a few words fr.:ln Mr. WALLACE and another Gentleman,
which were inaudible, the petition was read, and,,uPon the motion
of Mr. S. RICE, ordered to be printed.
Mr. S. RICE presented a Petition from' certain inhabitants of
the comity of Cork against the duty on copla.—Laid on the table..
A Message from the Lords announced that their Lordship. had
agreed in various Private Bills. Also requesting leave for the
attendarniance of J. GLADSTONE, Esq., to give evidence before the
Committie, inquiring into the system of circulating Promissory
Notes below the value of M. in Scotland and Ireland.—Leave was
given.
Mr. ItErrn DonoLas presented a Petition from Dalkeith
against city alteration in the Stock Curreucy.—Referred to the
,Cominitt se. _ _

Mr. D tprEN-soat
praying fur the Abolition of Slavery. •
presented a Petition from the city of Wells,
COURT OF CHANCERY.
Mr. svus rose to present a Petition upon a subject which
had claim( id much of the attention of the House. It referred to
the practice of the Court of Chancery ; and although he would
not go so ,far as, to. express himself in the language of hie
HonourabbtYriend, (the Member for Aberdeen), he would say that
the Court ofChancery„ if not a curse, was any thing but a bless-
ing. He meant no personal disrespect to the Noble Lord at the
head of than Court, but from all be knew of it he had no hesit-i-
-tiou in describing it as a public nuisance. The party from whom
the petition pine was no suitor of the Court, but a Gentleman who
had long pr0ct.1.—.... the profession of an attorney with great credit
and reapeculbility; The petitioner was Mr. Richard Garland, of
Kingston-upon-Hull. .The gravamen of his complaint to the
Howie was, that in the year 1814, having been engaged profes-
sioually in a-cause before the Court, his costs were taxed, and
the items allowed to hint by the Master, and paid; and that in
1846, twelve years after, the caw hail been re-opened by an order
of the Coutt, and he had been called upon to have the same bills
taxed again. The ilacuments relating to the case had been lust,
and he was not in a situation to go into it ; bit he had, liowevers
travelled up from Yerlothire, and in ohndiencw, to the order of the
Lord Chancellor, Z,orivented to have the cost re-taxed. The reetrli
Was, that although hi, hail attended week after week, and month
after month, Upon die Master, only three abillings and Nix pence
had been taken off, aid that was upon one item of eight shillinge
and six pence. In .eilnseeptenee of the delay of these proceedings,
the petitioner had retitrreal home an entirely ruined men. The
Hon. Member stated, l has he had. put this petition into the hauls
tithe SolicitorsOeuere4 end he defied him to disprove any of its
allegations, or to aronivs. the case.
The. SOLICI.TOR.IGENERAL said, .that the petition hatl

been put into his hands, and he had examined it, although he
had not been able to make. any further inquiries into the case.
lie considered it as a part of a systematic attempt to hunt down
the 'Chancellor. The complaint here was, -that because an
Attorney's Bill had been unfairly taxed, the Court had, .ordered it
to be re-taxed. The case was this :—Mr. Garland took a bond
of his client, by which he was bound to pay his untaxed costs,
which every gentleman in that House knew to be illegal. In the
next place, the costs were taxed when there was no adverse party
remaining. As soon as the adverse party had revived in another
person, an application was made to the Court, and in the judg-
ment given by the Lord Chancellor he said that the Bills had
been unfairly taxed, and that upon principles of public justice he
would order them to beye-taxed. This was one of the c;.ses upon
which the Court of Chancery was declared to he a curse to the
country, and upon which the Chancellor was libelled and calum-
niated.

Mr. HUME said, that alter taking time to reconsider what
fell from him upon a former" evening, he would deliberately
repeat what he then said. - Any institution which denied justice
to millions of the people of this country, and inflicted it mental
torture which no one couldknow but those who had to suffer it,
deserved to be desisibed,- as .Isis Jlon..frieud had described it,
as a public nuisance. Under the semblance of a COUrt of Jus-
tice, it was a
,Cpurt'a Injustice, and a Court of Iniquity. That'
House ought to have put a stop to the proceedings of such a
Court long ago., The Hon. Member for Surrey, in his zeal to
support the Court of Chairaet:y,h.al called it a bkSsing to the
country. God preserve him front such-blessings !--(Laughta..)
i.—The injustice of the Grand Signior was not so great as tVin-
justice.of the Court of Chancery. He inflicted immediate death
without torture; but here a mental tortur, was inflicted in every
possible shape. • Was it not a shame that thirty-nine millions of
'e property of the people of this country should be locked up in
Chancery, while they were, suffering eve!y species of di,itress and
privation? It was easy to see what would became of this money
some time or other. The Chancellor of Abe Exchequer, or Some
successors of his, would find it useful fortheir purposes; and it was
lying there as a nice nest-egg for them. It was safe wider the
lack of the Lord Chancellor, and it would never come out while
he remained, and the institution continued in its present state.
:He would repeat; that the institution was a curse, and he could
not separate from the institution those who directed and main.
tained it. .

. ,
, Mr. GREEN (we understand) made an observation, which
was not audible in the gallery.-=-Theivtitioh having been read,
Mr. SYKES said, that.. the Honontable and Learned Gentle-
man seemed to think nothing of\ the time that had passed before
thiCcase was re-opened. Twelve years Were. nothing to the Court
of Chancery—they reckoned by generations. He denied that the
Honourable and Learned Gentlemen had made out any answer to
the petition.
The. SOLICITOR-GENERAL expressed., his ,surprise, that
a Gentleman of the lloppun44la Alemler's judgment and discern-
meat, should undertake and continue to stipPort a petition which
shew.Hl upon the face of it that the petitioner had acted illegally,
and charged for copies_ which he..confesae4 litv,had never Made.
The Petition was ordered. to be printed.

Lord '41.11.T0N presented three Petitions from places in the
Cmuities of Northampton rant York, preying for the Abolition of
Slavery.--Laid on the table.
Sir J. NEWPORT moved to postpone the Order of the Day
for the further i;onsideration of the Report of the Bribeyy Elections
Bill, till Tuesday next.—Order postponed.

ADJOURNMENT.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved.that the
"House, at it, rising, do adjourn till Tuesday next: —Agreed to.

SUPPLY

Mr. GOULBURN moved the bringing up of the Report of the

Committee of Supply. - -
Mr. MIME said, that the Report contained a Resolution grant-
ing the sum of 7,0001. to be placed at the disposal of the Lord
Lieutenant for publishing Proclamations ; and this he would state
was used for the purpose of bribing those papers which supported
the Government. From the returns of the circulation of the
Newspapers in Irolaod; he should ha able to show e*astipb, of,
what he had asserted. BY an arrangement made by Mr. Welles-.
ley Pole, two papers, the Patriot and the Correspondint, from
being opposition papers, went round to the Government for the sum
of 2,0001. a year, which had ever since been paid to them, with
the exception of a recent reduction of about one fifth. . Ile could
prove the payment of regular_ sums of money to the feyoured
Newspapers by individuals in .tho Secretary's Otliee. In some
of them the same Proclamations were published twenty-six,
eiglitivn, twenty-two, and fifteen times. Another 'curious cit...
cumstance with tepid to the country papers was, that me ar-
,rangcments.were made- for them by the Members of Parini-
inept, .and the accounts were made out as between the Govern-
ment and the ,Members of Parliament. Front the returns before
the Howie, he would chew that the comparative suits of money
paid to the various papers were in proportion to the political sup-
part they, gave, to Government, and 'not to their circulation. • An
Athlone paper; circulating 1,950 stamps in a year, received 1181.
fur advertisements. The Patriot, circulating 80,000 Stamps, was
paid 8324 ; while the Dublin Evening Post, circulating 242,000
stamps, received the large sum of 181. 15s. ! The Correspondent
circulated 5%276 stamps, and received 415/. ; and the _Evening
Mail which circulated 800,000, did not receive une farthing Vile
would ask if any further proof were wiEting to show that this
money' was used for the purpose of bribe R,? After some further
ohscrvitionS, the Hon. Member said he should take the sense of the
llonse upon the motion.
Sir J. NEWPORT thought it would be an expedient plan to

repeal the duty on advertisements, and to compel the newspapers to
insert. Government proclamations gratuitously. Ile did not like
an idea which had been suggested, of confining them to the. (gazette
The'duty upon advertisements he conceived to be highly
injurious to the dissemination of intelligence.. • ,
Mr. GOLTLIIMIN said, that the lion. Member for Montrose
/was never More unfortunate than when he spoke of bribery a 9
committed by him ; for the instances adduced certainly related
to a prod when he was not in office. The lion. Member took
his statement of the amount paid to a newspaper from one
year, and of its circulation from another. The suns paid war)
'six, and not ,seven thousand
.pounds; two thousand of which
went to the Gnzetle, leaving only four thousand for all the other
papers; and, according to the English pmctice, the .money de-
voted to the purpose of proclamations would have been 9,0001.
HO had never made investigation of • the petty charges of news-
papers, having been occupied with muck snore important official
cancans, and het could assure the lion. Gentleman, that if he were
equally' occupied, he. would find it impossible to attend to such
trivial subjects. What could he (Mr. Goulburn) get by bribery
of the press ? Was there not a proof of his innocence of the charge
in the frequent . attacks which _were loads all hint throttith the

medium of, the..preas? He was quite unconscious whether the
Mago.ifournal or the Kerry Eroding Post were Opposition or
Government Papers. The faciliti of the Honourable Gentle-
man's reasoning was very remarkable. He said that the Kerry
Evening Post was a paper of Sir Robert Shaw's, and that the
money was paid td Sir Robert Shaw... Now the fact was, the
• Kerry Evening Post was a
.country paper, and Sir R. Shaw hap-
pened to be a Dublin banker. It was necessary for the paper to
have a banker in Dublin, and Sir R. Shaw being the one appoint-
ed, the money due M the paper was paid into his bank. HO was
as free from corruption as the Ifnu.. Gondeinan, who was •quite
liable to be deceived by relying on the inforination furnishiA him
by persons in public offices, who thereby betrayed
.the trust re-
posed in them. •
Mr. ELLIS said, the imputation that the Masters in Char

eery, gave their advertisements to certain Papers
.from political
motives, was totally 'unfounded. For twenty years, he (Mr. this)
had filled the office of a Master in Cliatiwry, and the selection of
the papers was never nifule by him, but by other Masters, and
that entirely with a View to • the circulation bestealeulitted to
,give publicity :to., their Advertisernetits. One of the papers eta.
ploved was Sivtaders's News»hotter, an advertising pupil-, ix,„
sesaing the unique feature of hay* no pclities at 41., It ohtuna:ll
aip,:p.:;.tie,,rl,l,etzipi,u;o3%,yeithet.:otouetT,wpe'
eltitoLlatyneni:4;:al:2::fa:orgi;:etaherikyturtp,atfoipot:dii.llticot:;:wt:em,triaiiitoi.ttAcl,poire_:.
a:toilet, and be believO, tho iNiaximum:Of circulation in a thnlin
cul4tiot, an tin. l,:ing,'rome.- More than, cinev had it clnuigol its
polities tines, yet under all changes the advertisements'were con-
titaio to it, lie hoped he had satisfied the, louse that the Charge
wai ; irat he was convinced that no satisfaction would

be enough foi:the Hon. 'Gentleman. As to the c3ntrect-stated to
have been made between 00ernment and the Wide Street Board,
he was himaelf one of the Ceinidiesioners of Wide .Street, and no
such proposal could have been made Without bis knowledge, - He
could assure the Hon. Gentlenian, that in this instance, too, .be
was misinformed; for the expellees of advertisements were more
than one half diminished during the time in which he Kid they
had made d correct contract with Government refipmtng nd-
vertisenients.—After a few words from Mr. Hum:, the Heins° di-
Vided.

For the Motion -
Againtit it
Majority for the Motion ..
CRIMINAL JUSTICE BILL.

On the motion of Mr. Secretary PEEL the House resolved
self into a Committee on the Criminal Justice
• In the.enurse of a conversation on the clause of the Bill between
Mesers. Peel, Brougham, and Denman, . • .
Mr.-PEEL stated, that it was his intention to bring in 'a Bill
neif Session, which would consolidate all the laws relating to Ste"
violation of property.
The Bill having gone through the Committee, the House re-
aumed ; the Report was received, and °flitted:to be printed, and
taken into further consideraticnt on-Tuesday.
• BANK CHARTER AMENDMENT RILL '
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
the house resolved itself into a Cintunittee on the Bank Clatter
Amendment
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated, that it was
his intention to introduce sonic aniondinentri in artier that 114:
Notes of Banking Companies might be:payable in London for soma
under the amount of 001.

A convocation on the subject of the Itill ensued, in which COl.
DAYlt$, Sir 11. PARNELL, RIO Mr. .1. SMITIi bore a part.
The clausei of the Bill having- been-a reed to, the House re-
sumed, and the Report was brought up, and ordered to be re-
ceived on Wednesday next.

CHURCH RATES IMIIELAND BILL.
On the motion that the Church Retest .in Ireland Rill should be
re-committed,
Mr. SPRING RICE, after slew observations, moved that it
should be an instruction to the'Cominittee, that a clause be intro—'
dined empowering the Protestant parishioners to assess the re-;
spective pariihes for wisistin.' towards the building, enlargement,
,and repairs of Presbyterian'Meeting-lieuses and Roman Catholic
chapels.'

icir. GOTTLEURN- said, that be Was particularly anxious to;
guard himself from the inisconstrUction to which he might be
liable, if in resisting this motion b
emore frepently adverted
to Roman Catholic Chapels than to the Itle,ting-houses of
other classes of Dissenters. He assured the House, that if :ca
should be led to do so in the-Course of his argument, it would
only be beCause he felt that this ClauSe if adopted, Would chiefly in
practice apply to Romp Cuthulje phew s of worship, and not be=
cause he considered the professor 4 of th:Lt. Nth leas entitled 'to the
advantages Conteinplated by it, float Dis,-eot,rs of every other .
de-
scription. He objected to the clause, upon the broad principle
that it went' to .ft distinction' whidi had always existed in
Lyour of the Established Religion. The present Bilkwas

duccd with a view to correct the'evils arising' from the' misappro-
pri.
ation of parochial airassinetits, an 'objeCt which, be might Yeu,.,
tore to say, bad obtained the general approbation of the
He had not introduced this Bill, becaus, be wks hiSeitsible• to the
benefits which might 'result from 'dis Viethe'hands
of Protestant Vestries, but he bad to choose between the public,'
benefits to arise fro% a diScretionary power, • and the priS.bable
abuses to which it might lead. The Bill took away no 44
power from the Vestries. The power which had been in some in-
stances exercised, of making compulsory assessments for the objects
the proposed clause bad in view, was always illegal. Neither did
the Bill create any obstruction to the voluntary, contributions of
individuals, for the purpose of building or repairing either Homan
Catholic chapels, or Dissenting meeting-houses. Re deprecated
the inconsistency of conduct in which they would. be 'misled by
the adoption •of the-clause. Parliament; whilst it declined upon.
principle to assist directly and openly perfettnttnee of 'sec-
tarian worship, would by this clause give in implied recommen-
dation to vestries to do so, a recommendation which, in the
circumstances in which Irish Voitriesi were generally placeti, would
operate upon them in effect as a compulsory inundate. Who was
to impOse a limit to the discretionary liberality of Vestries? lie
could not consent to give a • power to the majority of a Vestry of
displaying their liberality at the .expeoce of others--...a power of
compelling the whole body of the parishioners to contribute to ass
object which might be patronized front the genii:lie feelings of li-
herulity, but which might also, in sonic insLuces, be patronized
from interested motives. The poor psi ishioiier; whose goods wets
diitrained,..or whose cattle were impounded in cousegitence of this.
discretionary assessment, would, he apprehended, be much di.-

posed tnascribe the vote of the Vestry tar other feelings than libe-
rality. It was compulsory upon Vestries -to 'make assessments
for the repairs of Established Churches, And the parishioners
had the right of appeal, but what appeal could be provided
against improper assessments under the proposed Anise ?
Who was to check the excesies. or measure the degree of that
voluntary liberality of which Parliament had ssnctioned the in-
dulgence? If this diseontioning power was to hi granted to
Vestries for the repair of Catholic Chapels, why not also for
the maintenance of Catholic Priests? Why not for aiding the
funds of Bible .Societies ? Why not for any other purpose of bene-
volence. Ile asserted that the house had no right to make those
distinctions. By granting discretionary power:;, they would re-
move every security against improper assessments. If this clause

should form part of the Bill, the 'applications to Vestriee .in In..
land would assume the tone of demands, and it would promote
any thing rather than conciliation. It was not fair towards Pro.
testant Vestries to place them in so 'painful and difficult a situa-
tion. If the objevt..of the clause was one fit to be encouraged,
the duty of VeStries ought to be compulsory' and fixed, not
discretionary and undefined. It was not difficult to imagine cases,
in which it might be extremely important to persons at the head
of Vestries to stand well with their Catholic neighbours, and in
which the liberality which the clause perinitted them to exercise,
might become subservient to the purposes of populsrity. ' For
the reasons he had given, he thought it his duty to oppose the
clause.

Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, thut he could not refrain from
contrasting the conduct of this liberal country with that of the
comparatively barbarous state of Hungary, where nu person
was CX;11111elled to pay towards a religion of which 'he did not
approve. lie knew that in the city of Chigher aseesamonti had
beep made fur the purposes which the clause had in view, under
the eye of the Bishop; so that, in effect, the Bill as it, now
stood would deprieil the Vestries of a power width they bad beers
permitted to exercise. There did not appear to be any objection
to Vestries taxing the Catholic people, for the• purposes however
extravagant of the Protestant Church,.as in the case of St. Peter's.
Drogheda, where houses had been built at the public charge for
the Parish Clerk and Sexton.

• Sir R. I.C. INGLIS supported the clause. He thought the
offerings of private benevolence a preferable mode of attaining
the object, but as it could not be adequately accomplished by
such means, he would not withhold from Vestries the power of
assessment.

Mr. Secretary PEEL rose and said, that the greatest advan-
tages arose from the people being subjected only to definite charges.
He objected to the clause, because it left the charges -entirely inde-
finite; He quite agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet in respect
to the instance he had mentioned on a former occasion, of great
quantities of wine having been bought for the use of a church,
and in respect to that he had:mentioned to-night of houses being
built for the Parish Clerk and Sexton. These were both instances
of gross abuse, and it was a great`advantage of the present Bill that
it put a stop to such pioceedinga. They were creating, and must of
necessity create, a little Parliament in every parish ; but unquestion-
ably they ought to limit' its powers. If they thought that poor rate*
tight to be introduced into Ireland,- let them meet thequestiont
fairly. If this alteration wereto he made, en alteration u
purpe:ln4t
ca(dinviipstrel,hosihe svheoannhil linliosittine,s,:iyieswtlycd,reltoree,ant;tit:t2.4':ee ►wade
id let it
t0..1 the elause,.
not creep in by degrees and imperceptibly. H;Jits of en
because it appeared to him to involve the "I 6;“- 171,4'ilisted
Established Church. If it was right to ono"!
paper distinctions
I?hy twirheliic,bitthnemi,sltstal,bsolist riigettit,tchse,iyipoortoot art
abol.every
other.
Why should the clause have stopped at Presbyta lan Meetiud

Moue& There were molly other classes of Diesenters. Why
except Quakers,. or Wesleyan Methodists? Would not the pro-
posed clause operate with peculiar hardship upon the Quakers,
who were already assessed 'for the support of the churches of the
established religion, and who were compelled by it to contribute to
the support of another religion, to which they were still mere de-
cidedly and conscientiously opposed. He did not think the Pro-
posed measure would lead to the display of benevolent feelings; on
the contrary, he believed its effect would be to convert parish ves-
tries in Ireland into places of debate, disunion, and contention. He
was at a loss to, know how the machinery of the Bill could be ap-
plied to the clause. In respect to assessments for parish churches,
there was a proper authority to which appeals could be made. This
was within the jurisdiction of the Bishops and Archbishops; but
these Dignitaries of the Church, or the Courts acting in their name,
could not with great propriety be called on to determine the
proper eipences of a Roman Catholic Chapel. The House was
called upon to adopt a principle, without providing any regula.
Lions for reducing it to practice. This must present a difficulty
even to these who approved of the principle, but for his own part
lie felt the principle to be entirely inadmissible. If ever there was
a country in which it weallesirable that the charges to be assessed
by. Vestries should be detinite,.: that country was unquestionably
Ireland.... Partly on accouut of the peculiar situation of Ire-
land, and partly upon the principle that it Wafl itnconsistent with
the continuance of an established Church, he must oppose the

clause. ' -
, , .
After a few words from Mr. Wm. Smi
th, Mr. Martin (of Gal-
way), Mr. Trent, and Mr. S. Rice, in reply, the House divided,
'lltiten there appeared to be

25
60
-35

• For the Clause
Against it
Majority against the Clause -
The House then went into. Committee on the Bill.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT objected to several clauses, and par-
ticularly...to that which enables the Bishop to order the inhabitants
of adjoining parishes to pay for Church repairs. The Right Hon.
Burt, moved as an tunendment, that the inhabitants'of a parish
vehere there is no church, shall not be compelled to pay for repairs
to the next church.
Mr. i;OLTI.BURN said, as far as regarded himself, he was not
sorry this motion was made. It had been pressed against him as
harsh towards the Catholics. The Right Hon. Gentleman con-
tended that it was a provision in favour of the Catholics.
Mr. S. RICE said, the clause compelled parishe in Ireland to
be witted whether• they would or not.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said, the I3iehop had a right to order
churches to be repaired, and if he saved expense by ordering two
parishes to attend a church which did not want repair, it was a
convenience to the inhabitants.
• Mr. GOULBURN said, all they could do was to make the
church expenses fall equally, and the Clergy to do their duty. Gen-
tlemen would find that the Clergy in Ireland did their duty in the
most exemplary manner.
Mr. L. FOSTER said the churches of Ireland had long been
negleCted. Archbishop Laud, as early as the reign of Charles the
prst,v,omplained of the delapidated state of those churches. The
repaini lied been very properly made , the subject of legislative
enactment.
After some further conversation, the amendment was negatived.
Several other clauses being disposed of;
Mr. GRATTAN rose for the purpose of moving a clause to be
added to the Bill, which would empower parishes to assess taxes
fur the benefit of their poor. He would not say any thing as to
the merits of the clause at that late hour of the evening, but he
trusted the Howie would see the utility of it, and allow it to be
Mr. BROGDEN was afraid that the clause could not he added
to the Bill, because it contained matter quite foreign to the Bill
itself.

Mr. CROKER made a few' observations.
Mr. J. SMITH hoped the lion. Member would postpone his
clause till some future period..
After some observations from Mr. Csoant and Sir R. Hamm,
the clause was withdrawn.
The other clauses being agreed to file House resumed, the Re-
port was brought up and ordered for further: consideration on
Tuesday next. • .
The other Orders. of the Day were then disposed of, and the
•.
House adjourned at a QUARTEK-PAST ONe.