The Sun.
London, England, 1810-06-02 00:00:00

and Sir J.,lirt Newport, the Giant was postponed to
•
Wednesday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHFIQUER moved a
Grant of too,oool. for the relief of the-Poor Clergy.
The Right Hon. Gentleman. went into a lengthen,A
detail of the stipends they enjoyed in various parts
of the kingdom, and stated by what prorortions of
of the population they were severally paid. There
were in Eogland t 1,700 benefices, The stipends of
more thin 6000 of them did 'not exceed 1501. per
annum. The number of residents amounted to about
4.400 .; of non-residents to 6700. It was to be ob-
served, that some of the number were virtually resi-
dents, though they were non-residents ,in point of
law. He was, however, of opinion, that inore than a_
moiety of their number -were non-residents.- After
some further statements, he concluded enforcing on
the,Committee the propriety of the Grant.
Mr. TIERNEY thought the wealthy Clergy ought
to aid their poor brethren. Beneficed as they were,
it was monstrous to come to the public for relief.—
He did not mean to oppose the Grant, but he hived
some Honourable Gentleman, better qualified to treat
the subject than. himself, would give it his atten-
tion, and bring it before the House in the ensuing
Session. -

A long and desultory conversation followed, in
which
.Mr. W. SMITH, Sir J. NEWPORT, •Ite
CRANCELLOR of the EXCIIksaUER, Lord MILTON,
IVIr. W. WYNNE., and Mr. WILBERFortee-partici-
paced.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL did-not know that.there
had been any valuation of the First Fruits since the
reign of Queen Anne. He supported the reolu-
Lion.

Mr. H. MARTIN observed, that the Leained Gen-
tleman did not. conceive the true meaning of the
statutes of Queen Anne. He entered into a detail
of the various arguments advanced by Bishop Bur-
' netion the % aluation of First Fruits, and adduced the
numerous Statutes which had,been enaaed on this
suhjed.

He alleged that the persons who now di-

tide among themselves the property of the Church,
are infinitely richer than any part of the laity. Till
there was
,brought before the' House a proof of
there being Clerigymen totally Onprovided for, he
would not give his consent to the Resolution.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought that it would
disturb a point of law, if the First Fruits were not
collated legally. He supported the Resolution.

Mr. A. BARING and Mr. D. GIDDY made a few
observations in opposition to the motion. The
question was then ptit, aid the resolution, was
agreed to.
:Mr. WHARTON then proposed the following re-
solutions, which were severally agreed to.
A grant to his Nlajt:sty of 2817. fur defraying the expellees
.of printing tzso Copies of the 23th and 29th volumes of the
journals of the House of Peers.
41564 for printing certain Copies of the journals of
the House of Peers, commencing with the time of Henry
V 1 I I .
r,iso for defraying outstanding demands fc.r works and
repair's done to both Houses of Parliament, and the Speaker's
tiuuse. •

£ 1.5 16 :or erecting light-houses at Helig6land.
szi for the carrying into etled a plan tor exploring the
interior of Africa. -
£BB5 t for defraying the ex pences of improvements in the
avenues,leading to Westminster-hall.
.£21,000 as compensation for the services of the Commis-
sioners Of Public Expenditure.
4'Booo for the compensation of the services of the Com-
missioners of Windsor liinest.
• £3ooa to the Nlatiailal Vaccine institution.
444 to :flake good cotani sums due tv the' Cover= of
Fort St. George. ~ .
£389 for
.tlic Prionlll\.Shesr.;tess. .
£42(, to Mr. T. Nichols
_to: Superintending the Accounts
01 the Exchequer.
316 to the_ Magistrates of the Thames Police.
249 to Mr. Edward Walinsly. •
e)b to Mr. G. l)ickons tot Stationary sent to the Cape
of Good Hope. • -
56 to
.11r. I. Read, to carry into effed the plan for the
eslaHishment of a I.tt'se.patroie. , • .7 .
£37; to Mr W. Chinner, for expences iacurred in the ser-
vice of Parliament in the year 1809.
On the suggestion of Mr. WIIITBREAD, the two
following resolutions. were postponed . for
..a • fur-
ther consideration to Wednesdil 0341. .to Mr. •
-James Reild, for the -expellees of Special Consta—
bles employed in :he hate disturbances ; and 1931. to
the representatives of Mr. Morris, late Surveyor- Ge-.
neral of Nova Scotia.
The House resumed, and the Report of the
Committee
.was ordered to-be brought up to-mor-
.
row.

A message from the Lords announced their as-
sent to the London Docks Bill; the Excise Super-
annuation Bill ; the Loan Bill ; the Jsle of Man
Consolidauoi Bill ." and ieveial other private Bills.
On the motion Mr. BAN &Es, the Report et. the
Committee on Public Expenditure was ordered to be
printed.
Mr. WHAr,Toz4 brought up the Report of the pro-
ceedings of the N itional Vaccine Institution. Or-
dered to be printed.

that the Catholics had been led id consider the

Union as the furerutiner ut their eman. ipation, ,At
a time when a general Union was neces-ary to our,
safety, bigotry should not be suffered to cut .the si-
news of our strenKth, an example should be taken
from the surrounding desolation.
Mr. O'Hara. was sorry, twin private considera-
tions, to differ from the Right Honourable Mover;
he was-not, however, to CatholicAmanci-
pation,,but Parliament havaig in 1792 granted to t he-
general body certain pi and removed various
restraints under which they Libor:red:he thought
they ought to be content.. He- could not "concede to
them legislatiVe power, because that would be con-
trary to the principles of the Constitution.
The Marquis of TAVISTOCK adjured the House to
go into the Committee, in order 'to satisfy the Ca-
tholics that they were ready to examine into their
claims, and give such relief as was just, reasonable;
wise, and politic. It would be, in ,his opinion, more
dignified in the House so to act. With respea to
the Veto, that appeared to him as having been drawn
in to embarrass the question, and he did not see any
benefit to he derived from it. He doubted much
whether they could conscientiously grant it.
Sir T. TUItTOI.I" expregsed himself It iendly to Ca-
tholic Emancipation, but should vote against going
into the Committee, because he conceived the time
is chosen.

Mr. TALBOT 'supported the motion which he
thought was neceshary for the preservation of lie-
land. If the claims were granted,-it would be the
means of strengthening the interests of the king-
doms.

An Hon. Member could not agree to the,motion,
having no hopes of satisfying the great body of the
Catholics. .He was disposed to admit the loyalty of
of the major part, bat thought the king should _have
the coutroul over the religious establishment.
Mr. PARNELL was in tabour of the motion., die
not apprehend the danger w,liiCh some did in ad-
mitting their claims, because the influence of the
Pope was not so great as Many seemed to think.- He
drew a parallel between the cases ot Irehiod and Eng-.
land., and Wales and England, previons_to the 'repre-
sentation of 'Wales in Parliatnenr,. in the reign of
Henry the Eighth, and recommending
.c9n-
cessions to Inland, as the means of uniting the
People and securing the Constitution. He referred
to a declaration ot the Catholics of Kildare, made
the 9th May, to spew that they %s ere ready to make
canoes tiotis.

Sir RALPH MILBANKE recommendecrto the House
to secure 'the affections of the People of Ireland, by
acceding to the claiin-s'of the Catholics, founded as
they were, on the principles of justice.
Mr. M`NAGHTON would not agree to the claims,
unless tije Catholics would give to his Majesty a ne-
gative in the nomination of the prelacy.
Mr. BA aHAN supported the motion, and contend,
ed that the Catholics had clear and indefeasible
rights which it behoved the House to grant. He
deprecated what Le termed intolerance to nearly four
millions of people Who had defended the Kingdom
against the common enemy. The House were
bound to attend to the Petition on every principle of
justice.

Captain PARKER contended.that. the Catholics in
out service were not oppressed by Protestant par-

Mr. R. DIiNDAS replied to the arguments of the
former Speakers. • He wished to know if the Right
Hon. Gentleman who So much wished to go into the
Comities had any thing to propose on•the sutjeal of
the veto that would be likely to satisfy the Catholics
of Ireland. Ha was assured he had not. If the
opinions ofs Lord Grenville, Lord Grey, and Lord
Lansdowne were worth any thing, he thought the-
Right Hon. Gentleman would have done well not to
have brought the subject forward at this moment.--
As long as circumstances continued to be such that
the question could not be discussed without exciting
feelings dangerous to theState,:so,long, •for one, he
must oppose going; into a COminittee on the sub-
jet. • . , •
Mr. W. WYNNE concurred in the propriety of
guarding against the effeeks of a foreign nomination,
but contendcd, they ought to endeavour to make
some arrangement which would be satisfaCtory to
satisfactory to both parties, as giving the Catholic
emancipation, and the P.rotestant. security. • He
should.tlk.refore most cheertullygive his vote for go-
ing into the Committee.

• -Mr. M. EITZGURALD did not thank the veto ne-
cessary: He would pledge hitnsQlf, that while the
Pope remained a pri6onvr, the Catholics of Ireland
would have no communication with him.

The SOLICITOR-GENERALi 'alter some observa-
tion on the general principle, obeded to going into
the Committee, because it would lead to no praEti.
cal good, and it would be worse to rcjeal the prayer
of the Catholics after going " into a Committee than
Sin the present state of thins.
Sir G. SEBRIGUT suppot ted the motion.
Lord G. GRENVILLLE dtiendeci a passage of the
Letter of Lord Grenville which had been"advert-
ed to.

Mi. P. MooRE made some observations, but the
cry for the question was• se great, that, he could not
be heard in the Gallery. • •
Mr, GRATTAN replied. He concluded by observ-
ing, that the State had no right to make a law of
Heaven. It was true that the Pope invested, but
he did not nominate. The present policy seemed to
be to draw a line of communication between Ire-
land and Fiance, and one of separation between Ire-
land and Gtaat Britain.

Mr. RYDER explained,
The question was then loudly called for. The
House divided.
. For the question - 'tog
Agautst it 213
Majority -104
The motion was of course lost.—Adjourned at.
Four o!Clucls this morning.