The Sun.
London, England, 1821-05-22 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

'MISCELLANEOUS.
.Mr. MAXWELL obtaimd ten days leave of abs,ence for
Lc zti A. Hamilton, on urgent private business. •
:sir. %lACKENZIE presented a petition from the Owners
and Occupiers of Land in the County of Selkirk, against the
Scotch Juries Bill.—Laid on the table.

Mr. T. WILSON presented a petition from several Mer...
chants and Traders on and near the River Thames, against the
London Wharfs Bill.—Laid on the table.
The House then went into a Committee on the London
Wharfs Bill. •
After a few words from Mr. T. Wilson, 11Ir. Calvert, Sir J.
Yorke, Mr. Ellice, and Mr. P. Moore,
A division was called for on one of the Clauses, but the
Rouse did not divide.

On 1:i-entering the Gallery, we found the Speaker in the
Chair; and
Mr. D. BROWNE on his legs on the subject of the Irish
Inland Navigation. The Honourable Member -said, that his
cola object in introducing this Bill was to improve the present
wretched state of the commerce and agriculture in Ireland.—
/le concluded by moving that leave be given to bring in a Bill
to promote the Inland Navigation of Ireland.—Leave given.
Mr. DENISON presented a petition from the Church-
wardens arid InhabitantS of the Parish of Mitcham against the
Newington Vestry Bill.—Ordered to be referred to the Corn-
mitteeon the said Bill.

Lord W. BENTINCK postponed 'his motion on the affairs
-a Sicily to the sth of .June.
.Air. C. HUTCHINSON presented a Petition from Ro-
bert Barry, one of the Coroners of the County of Tipperary,
against certain clauses in the Irish Coroners' Bill.—Laid on
the table.

Mr. ELLICE presented a petition from several persons, for-
merly tide waiters, who had been discharged in consequence of
receiving certain fees which were prohibited.
After a few words from the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
Sir Wm. Curtis, and Mr. Baring, the petition was laid on the
table.

• General GASCOIGNE presented a petition from Liver-
•pcal against the Penitentiary Bill ; Petitioners also prayed
tbs.t means might be devised to prevent the increase of the
County Rate.
After a few words from Mr. BENNET, the petition was laid
oa the table.
Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON asked the Right Ikon. Gentle-
man (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) opposite, whether he
intended to make any alteration in the Irish Distillery Laws, or
to adhere to those made last year ?
ghe CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that he
did not at this late period intend to make any alteration.
COAMITTEE OF SUPPLY.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then
anoved the Order of the Day for going into a
Committee of Supply.
•

Mr. CREEVEY then rose to call the attention of
the House to an item in the Estimates, which he
-understood were to be submitted to them that
-evening, on which, before they went into the
-Committee, he would take the liberty of propos-
ing a Resolution. The item he alluded to, was
a sum of 5,9001. for the repair of fortifications,
.&c. in the island of Barbadoes. Now, the rea-
son of his objecting to this vote was, that there
was a fund supplied by that island; as-well as
-mostly all the Leeward Islands, for the express
purpose of keeping in repair these fortifications,
and until he knew that the fund was properly ad-
ministered according to the intention of those
that granted it, he could not consent to vote away
-the public money of this country for any such
purpose. As a proof of the existence of this
fund, and of its nature being as he had stated, he
would only refer to the Journals of the House.—
CThe Hon. Member accordingly directed the
lerk of the House to read from the Journals pe-
titions presented from certain individuals in the
-years 1663 and 1702, praying the interposition
of the House to cause the proceeds of a duty of
4-1: per cent on the imposts of the island to be
applied, as originally intended, to the repair of
the fortifications and other works erected for the
defence of the island.]—These extracts having
been read, the lion. Member proceeded to ob-
serre, that there was sufficient proof on the Jour-
nals of the House of the original intention of those
who granted this fund being as he had stated ;
and he had reason to believe that instead of its
being appropriated as it ought to be, it was to-
tally absorbed by the Crown, and dispensed in
the support of a number of placemen and pen-
sioners. This fund he knew was disposed of by
distribution amongst many Lords and Ladies in
the country, and Gentlemen in that House, and
he knew, therefore, that he should have the
votes of many in that House who held these
funds in their hands against his motion. This he
did not doubt, and indeed he wished to point out
-to the House that almost all the late votes on the
Estimates had been carried by the official men
alone in that House. This was a pretty state for
them to be in, when all the public money was
voted away by those Gentlemen who were in-
terested in its being so voted and -employedas it
was. The Hon. Member passed a high encomium
on the labours of the Hon. Member for Aberdeen
(Mr. Hume), to expose the abuses in the expen-
diture of the public money, and concluded by
moving the following Resolution as an Amend-
ment :

" That it appears to this House, by the Ordnance Estimates
for the present year, that there is a charge of 59001. for repairs
of fortifications and other military works in the island of Bar-
badocs ; and as it also appears by reference to the Journals of
the House that there is a certain sum collected out of the re-
-venues of that island for the purpose of acfraying.the repairs of
the public buildings, forts, &c. ,of that island, it is the opinion
-Qf the House that it cannot, consistently, with its duty, vote the
said sum of 59001. till it is satisfied that this tax has been faith-
fully applied and found inadequate."
(Before the question was put from the Chair, a message from
the Lords was received, acquainting the House of their Lard-
al-4s' assent to several ]load Bills.]
The question 'having been put,

Sir CLOSIG said, that he could not conceive
.the House would be induced to accede to the

propositions of die Hon. Member for Appleby,
iri opposition to the established practice of Par-
liament' with reference to the fund for the last
century. The grant of this fund was distinctly
made for his Majesty, his heirs, and successors
for ever; and if ever there was money which
ought to be indisputably regarded as belonging
to the permanent revecne of the Crown, it was
the money derived from that source. There cer-
tainly was ground for a claim on the part of the
island of Barbadoes alone to the effect stated by
the- Hon. "Alember ; but if he would look at the
circumstances under which that claim was made on
the-occasions lie had directed the attention of the
flotise to, he would find that the case had greatly
altered with the time's. Since those periods Bar-
hadoes had been made a naval depot, and its de-
fence
,well provided for, to which end frequent
grants had of money had been made by this coun-
try. The mariner in which this Fund was at pre-
sent applied had been recognized over and over
again by Parliament ; and in the year 1797, a Com-
mittee of that House had declared that the fund
was appiicable in such manner as the King shoUld
think fit. - The Hon. Member said, that its sole
purpose was to repair the fortifications • yet on
one of the occasions quoted by the Hon. Member
the Address •of that House to the Crown prayed
his Majesty so to apply thw:e fundsofter paying
the Earl of Kinnoul his annuity out of it. There
had not been a Lawyer of eminence for the last
century who had not'given it as his opinion that
the present application of it was legal. For
these reasons he should oppose the amendment.

Sir F. BURDETT maintained that it never could
have been the intention of those who granted this
fund for the repairs of fortifications in the West
India Islands, that it should be applied to the
corruption of Members of that House. It was no
argument in favour of such an application, that
it had existed for a century ; and if the fund
were in the control of the Crown, it was like all
other money so situated, intended for the benefit
and not the detriment of the public ; and when
Parliament saw that the Cro4n had other re-
sources than it gave, it would be backward to
agree in all the grants proposed for that purpose.

Mr. GOULBUILN contended that the fund was
strictly at the disposal of the Crown, and what-
ever the Honourable Baronet might think of the
manner in which it was expended, the characters
of those who received pensions from it, repelled
imputation.
Mr. MONCK said, it was clear that, even if the
application of the funds collected from the others
of the Leeward Islands were not laid down by
Act of Parliament, it was granted for a national
purpose, arid not for the support of pensioners in
that House.—The House then divided :

For the Amendment - - , - - 53
Against it - - - - - - 88
Majority _ - - - -28.

On our re-admiSsion we found the House in
Committee upon a vote of 94,000/. for the Staff
of Artillery.

THE CORONATION.

Mr. MoNcii wished to ask the Hon. Gentleman
opposite d question on the subject of the Corona-
tion. He wished for information on a matter re-
lative to it, which every one interested for the
RoyalTamily, and looking up to them with that
regard which he sincerely felt, must consider of
some importance at the present moment. Every
person so feeling, must see, with extreme repug-
nance, any slight offered to any Member of the
Royal Family, and must especially complain of
the omission of any established usage which
went to give peculiar dignity to one member of
the Royal Family. It would be in the recollec-
tion of every Member of that House, that in the
course of the last session of Parliament, a sum
had been voted for the Coronation—he believed
100,0001. had been voted for, that purpose.
When that grant was agreed to by the House it
was under circumstances very different from those
of the present day. It was then very doubtful
whether the Queen would ever return to this
country, and it was therefore not thought necessary
to.consider at that time what arrangement in the
event of her coming would be proper to be made
for her. On this subject he had now to ask two
questions. The Ist was, whether any arrangements
were made for the part that illustrious person
might sustain in the ceremony ?.and the 2d, whe-
ther, if any • such arrangements were made, it
would be necessary to call on Parliament for
a_ new grant in addition to the 100,0001. already
voted on account of the Coronation ? He
for one was not disposed to believe the
rumours that he had heard abroad, that
while provision was made for securing seats
for the Peeresses of England, no provision was
made for" the accommodation of the most Il-
lustrious Personage in the country. This he
mentioned as a rumour that he had heard, but it
was one that he could not bring himself to be-
lieve. After what had passed in the last session
of Parliament, it could not be denied that the
Queen was as much Queen of this country as the
King was King of it. Any vote that might be
proposed to make suitable arrangements for her
Majesty he was confident would be well received
by the country, however large the sum proposed
might be, if the same were well and justly ap-
plied for the Queen's accommodation. If, how-
ever, the sum which had been voted was not in-
tended, nor any part of it, to be appropriated—
if the Coronation festival was intended not to
give new lustre, but to throw a stigma on her
Majesty, he then thought-that any sum of money
that might be so expended would be considered
objectionable, not only by the Members of that
House, but by the people (almost universally)
out of doors. He hoped the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would satisfy the public mind by giv-
ing some answer to this question.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
really see bow the question just asked grew out
of a proposed vote of money for the pay of the
Royal Artillery in a Committee of supply. He
could not see that any clear ground was laid for
the question at all. Such a one would only be-
come necessary if a larger slam should be asked
to cover the expenses of the Coronation. At
present, however, the question was wholly un-
necessary, as he could assure the Hon. Gentle-
man that Ministers had nn intention of calling for a

new grant on account of the Coronation, in the
course of the present Session of Parliament.

Mr. Moscrc thought there was nothing irrele-
vant in the qUeStion which he had put to the
business of a Committee of Supply. In a Com-
mittee of Supply he had thought that Members
were not obliged to confute themselves to the sub-
ject in debate, but were at liberty to bring for-
ward all the charges of the empire. He therefore
conceived the question to have been perfectly in
order; but if, from what had fallen from the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, they were to col-
lect that Alini'sters were disposed to give no in-
formation on this subject, he hoped that some
Munber of greater importance tha❑ himself
would bring it before the House in a regular
mot ion.

Mr. HumE said, the Right Hon. Gentleman
had but half answered the second question of the
Hon. Gentleman, lie had stated that Minis-
ters meant to move for no additional grant on ac-
count of the Coronation in the course of the
present Session of Parliament. He wished to
know if they had any intention of doing so in any
subsequent Session ?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated it
to be impossible for him to say then what it
might be necessary to do in a future Session. A
grant of 100,0001. had been taken, on the sup-
position that that sum would be sufficient to cover
the expences of the Coronation. When the ac-
counts came to be made up, he could not say what
the result../light be.
Mr. BENNET contended, that according to an-
cient custom the Members of that House, before
granting a supply, had a right to call for informa-
tion on every subject, and to bring forward every
grievance of which they had to complain. He
was therefore of opinion that the questions. of the
lion. Gentleman ought to be answered.
The Marquis of LoNnoNoEnny said Ministers
had been taken by surprise in this instance ; but
admitting that all grievances might fairly be
brought forward in a Committee of Supply, he
still thought a good deal of ingenuity would be
required to prove that any thing connected with
this question that bad been asked came before
them in the shape of a grievance. If it would be
a grievance that her Majesty should not be
crowned, still the Honourable Gentleman would
have a good deal of difficulty in proving•that this
grievance could as yet be complained of by the
representatives of the people. If the Hon. Gen-
tleman wished for any information on the subject,
he and his Right Honourable Friend were little
disposed to shelter themselves under technical
objections, or to use the form,s of that House to
evade inquiry. He apprehended that those he
then addressed had not to learn that it depended
on a positive act of the Crown whether the Con-
sort of *the reigning Sovereign should share the
honours of a Coronation. The decision on this
subject came within the Royal Prerogative—was
the clear, undoubted, undisputed right of the
King. As to the way in which that prerogative
would be exercised on this occasion, he had no he-
sitation in saying, that heand his Majesty's Minis-
ters were not prepared to advise that the Queen
should be crowned with the King. Having stated
this, if there existed any wish to raise the dying,
or rather the dead embers of those fires which
had raged in time minds of time people, but which
no longer prevailed, the consequences must rest
on the heads of those who were capable of acting
such a part. Ministers were perfectly ready to
take upon themselves any responsibility that
might attach to the course which they thought it
their duty to pursue.
Mr. BROUGHAM, in consequence of what the
Noble Lord had said, felt it his duty to say a
few words. lie was taken as much by surprise
as the Noble Lord could he. If that to which
the attention of the House had been directed
was regarded as a matter of grievance, he was of
opinion that it might regularly lie brought for-
ward in a Committee of Supply. With respect
to The strict legal right of the Crown to give or
withhold the honours of a Coronation to the
Queen Consort, he did not wish to be under-
stood as 'giving his assent to that proposition, and
he only rose on the present occasion that silence
on his part might not be mistaken for an admis-
sion that the Noble Marquis was correct.

The Resolution having been read,

HUME objected to the amount of the grant
proposed. At present in the artillery there were
nine battalions, each consisting of eight compa-
nies. If the battalions were made to contain ten
companies of seventy-three men each, as was the
case before the French war, the result would be
a saving of the Staff of 3 battalions, which with
other expellees connected with that would give
a reduction of expence to the amount of 25,0001.
without reducing the number of men now pro-
posed to be kept up in the artillery. He would
therefore move that the Grant before the 1-louse
be reduced by the sum of 25,0001. and substitute
for the vote proposed by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man tit° sum- of 69,0001.
Mr. R. WARD shewed, that the time necessary
to make gogd Artillery Officers had made it ap-
pear desirable to reduce the number of men with-
out reducing the Officers in proportion, as it was
desirable that the Officer should be kept in prac-
tice. He also shewed, that a full complement of
Officers was always necessary from the circum-
stance of the artillery corps being much more dis-
persed when on active service than was usual
with a regiment of the line.
Mr. HumE was of opinion that the artillery
could not now be kept in practice, and therefore,
considering it only a question of expense, thought
the reduction he had recommended might be
effected.

Sir U. Button spoke of the inconveniences
arising from the slowness of promotion in the
Artillery Corps. In the Peninsular war, the
Lieutenants who at. first commanded were so old
that they did not possess sufficient bodily vigour
to endure the fatigue of campaigning. From the
difficulty of finding Officers who possessed suffi-
cient vigour of mind and body to go through the
service, dnring the last three years of the war in
Spain, the artillery, consisting of 6000 men and
5000 horses, was commanded by Capt. Dicken-
son; and at Waterloo, the artillery, comprehend-
ing 7000 men and 6000 horses, were in the same
way commanded by Lieutenant Sir G. Wood.

At present there were but two hundred men in
the artillery over the number kept up in 1791
and 1792. Stating that, he did not include in
the comparison the Horse Artillery and the
Driver Corps, as they were not in existence at
the time he had .mentioned. He stated 22,000
of the artillery to have been reduced since 1804,
out of '28,000. This was •a greater reduction
than had been made in any other corps.
Mr. 13tNNET said, in 1792, the expence of
the artillery was 112,0001. It was now 394,600/.
He was of opinion that the artillery ought to be
re-modelled.

Mr. R. Winn spewed the number of men in
the artillery i❑ 1792 was 4,365. Had the new
colonies been then in our possession, providing
for them on the same scale, would have added to
the 4,365 men 748, , making a total of 5,113.
The actual number now kept up was 5,575,
being an excess of 462. In 1792, it was also to
be remembered, that no provision was made for
retie fs.

Mr. Hums did not see bow the arguments of
the two Hon. Members applied to his reasoning.
His objection was not to the number of men, but
to the number of. Officers. He meant to propose
that the staff of three battalions, which he held
to be unnecessarily kept up, ,should be placed on
half pay, and the reduction. thus made, with the
savings on allowances, &c. would amount to the
sum he had mentioned.—The House divided,
For the Motion - - - - 43
For the Amendment - - 16
Majority - • - - - —27
The following grants were then moved :
For the. Royal Corps of Artillery Drivers, including .
&rage for riding-horses - ' - - - £17;590
For the Medical Establishmennt of the Ordnance in

Great Britain - - - - - • - 8,377
Mr. HUME objected to the increased expense for the Medi:
cal Establishment. They had been augmented ninefold since
1792. He complained of the salaries of certain individuals,
and especially of the office of the. Director-General, who en-
joyed an income of £1,095. .
Mr. R. WARD said, in 1792, there was,no Medical Esta-
blishment connected with the Ordnance • that deserved so to be
called. It was then the custom to have recourse to practi-
tioners in various parts of the country. This occasioned a con-
siderable expense, not merely in pounds, shillings, and pence,
but in, efficiency. He then explained and defended the various
arrangements of the establishment.
Mr. HUME renewed his objections to the grant, and moved,
as an amendment, that £3,778 should be taken from the grant
proposed.
Sir U. BURGH complained of the amount of the reduction
proposed by the Hon. Gentleman: If a reduction of 3,0001.
were made from 8,0001. he did not know how they should get
on at all.

Sir J. YORKE said,. they might get rid of the Director-
General.—The Committee divided—

For the Amendment - - - 18
Against it . - - - - - 47
Majority - - - - -29
Mr. WARD then proposed the sum of 66101. for the pay of
Civil Officers, Professors, and Masters of the Royal Academy
at Woolwich.

Mr. HUME said, that all the benefit the public derived
from that institution was the education. of 30 persons, each of
whom cost the sum of 1700 L The present grant was not the
whole demanded from the House. There had been £B,OOO
granted for the pay of those persons. Before he would pro-
ceed with any proposition tending to a reduction of that esta-
blishment, he wished to learn whether any reduction was con-
templated by Hon. Gentlemen opposite ?
Sir U. BURGH assured the Committee that every means of
economy had been introduced into the establishment. It had
been once as high in number as 1110, and it was reduced to 150.
There would not be more than 100 young men in it in a few
year,, in consequence of the regulations which had been intro-
duced.

Mr. FIUME maintained, that the establishment ought to be
reduced to 50 ; it was a complete waste of money to have more
young men than could be provided for. One-fourth of the
number of cadets there could only he provided for. He there-
fore should propose a reduction of the number from 150 to 50
only. It was a cruelty to bring,up-young men without having
the means of realising their expectations. He therefore moved,
that the sum should be 3,3051.
Mr. WARD,said, that there were arrangements made in
order to have the establishment reduced to 100, before any new
-members would be admitted into it. The regulations for the
Cadets from the College into the service, were such as would as
well prove serviceable to the Officers on half-pay, as to the
young men in the College, for the stream of promotion flowed
through regular channels to each.

After some further observations from Mr. Bernal, Sir H.
Harding, Sir U. Burgh, Mr. Hume, and Mr. Bennet, the
Comthittee divided—
For the Amendment - - 20
• Against it - - - - 63
Majority in favour of the original grant - —43
11,458 for fees payable to the Officers of the Exchequer, as
fees arising from payments-to the Ordnance Department.
Mr. BERNAL objected to such a system of fees.
Sir H. PARNELL objected to the confused manner in which
accounts were kept.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained
the manner in which the accounts were kept, and that it arose
from the nature of the business transacted.
Mr. HUME wished to know when a return might be ex-
pected respecting the fees he had moved for a month ago ?—He
wished all fees to be abolished; the House would then know the
actual expences.
Sir C. LONG said, when the Hon. Member talked of fees,
he confounded those arising from the issues of mollies, and the
passing of accounts, which were widely different.
Sir H. PARNELL explained.
The ReSolution was then as-Treed to.
1:39,000 was then moved for the balance of Extraordinarics of
the Ordnance Service in Great Britain.
Mr. HUME wished to know if this was for the whole of the
extraordinaries ?
Mr. WARD answered in the affirmative. . . • .

Mr. HLTME said the CoMmittee was Called upon to vote no
less than 270,0001. contained in five pages of the Estimates ; he
wished the charges for the Colonies were 'comprised under one
head, instead of several votes for each, under the various heads
of Army, Navy, and Ordnance ; in addition to which the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer would be bringing forward the Civil
Contingencies. He insisted that the extravagant scale of the
Eslablishment at Gravesend, under the head Of Repairs, ought
to be corrected. This was the third year he •• had called the at-
tention of the. House to the expences of the powder mills at Fe-
versham and Waltham Abbey, which required to be reduced.
In speaking of the persons employed, he said they lived EN
PRINCE, it was 0:1'1E11 completely taken.
Mr. WARD said, in another -3,ear the Estimates would be
more detailed, the temporary would be separated from the per-
manent charges. - A pledge was given some time ago that no
new works should be undertaken without a correct plan. In the
present Estimates no new works had been anticipated. The
expellees of the Colonies .were now the same as they were in
1792. With respect to Heligoland, that was quite a political
question, and not fhr him then to argue but if it was to be dis.
cussed, he thought
.he could shew the advantage to be derived
from it. With respect to Waltham Abbey, he found upon in-
quiry that -we could not give up that establishment on account
of tha expences that would attend the removal of the stores. At
any rate it would be-impolitic to give up the powder manufac-
tories altogether.
Sir W.. CONGREVE said, that considerable saving arose
from the establishment at Feversham, • not less on the whole than.
£1,573,803. There were now on hand 300,000 barrels of gun-
powder, which, at an expense of 10s. each barrel, might be
rendered worth .E 5 a barrel..

'Air. BERNAL objected to the mode in whieh the Ordnance
accounts were kept, and the number of draft horses kept up on
the establishment.

Mr. 'WARD said, it was impossible the artillery could be
worked without horses.

After a few words from Mr. Humr, Mr. D. GILBEUT, and
Mr. BENNET, the Committee divided on the Resolution.—
Ayes - - - - 99
Noes - - - - 53
Majority for the Resolution --46
On our re-admission into the Gallery, we found Mr. Ward
on his legs, moving a vote of 111,8371. for the Ordnance of
Ircland.

Mr. lIUME remarked upon the large establishment kept up
for Ireland,. the Storekeeper of Dublin being paid as much as
the Storekeeper of Woolwich. The Hon. Member, after some
further observations on the necessity of reducing the Establish-
ment, concluded by moving an Amendment, taking off 4,4501.
from the vote.

Sir J. NEWPORT said a few words; in a very low tone of
voice, in favour of the Amendment.

111, WARD defended the original motion, and contended

that from the nature of the slxvice, the Establishment was no
unnecessarily large.
After some further conversation between Sir H. PAux,ELL,
Mr. Hu ME and Mr. WARD, the House divided— _
,

For the Amendment'
Against it -

- 53
- 92

Vajority in favour of the Resolution --=39
The sum of 299,6231. was then voted for half.pay of the Ord.
nance Establishment, and 'Widows' Pensions • 11,2751. for a
similar purpose ; 4.2791. far Superannuated Allowances and
Allowances for Children of deceased Officers ; 36,6581. for thz-
.Alloifrances to Persons whose services did not extend to nil-i
years' service.
After a few words from Mr' HuNE, Mr. J. SsHTIr, czi
Mr. VARD, the item was voted.
'l' ther resoluticmx were then moved and agreed to, after
whichir
e Chairman reported progress. The House resumed,
and the report was ordered to be received to-morrow.
• IRISH REVENUE.

Sir JOHN NEWPORT asked. if it was the intention of his
Majesty's Government to appoint COMMissioners to collect 0:
revenue in Ireland. He did not object t6G9vernment appoiat-
ing such Commissioners. He thought if they were properly
sected, much good might be done, but if the Commissioners
were not proper persons; the greaiest inconvenience would arise.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated
that it was his intention to move for the appointment of the
Committee alluded to by the Hon. Member ; at the same time.
due care would be taken to select proper persons for the purpose.
The other orders of the day were then postponed, and the
HouSe then adjourned at ONE O'CLOCK.

SOCIETY FOR THE ENLARGEMENT AND BUILD-

ING OF CH URCHES AND CHAPELS.

The Adjourned General Meeting of the ahove Society was
held yesterday at the Society's HOus?, Lincoln's Inn-fields, for
the purpose of receiving the Report of the L.-.st year's proceed-
ings, and electing 'Officers, &c. 'f'or the ensuing year.--Shortly
after twelve o'clock, his Grace the Archbishop of CANtE7Z-.
itillt.l" took the Chair, and addressed the Meeting in a .brief
speech. There were present the Bishops. of Chester, Salis-
bury, Gloucester, and Llandaff, Lord Kenyon, Sir Robert
Peel, Bart., Sir.T. D. Ackland,- Bart., and several other emi-
nent persons._ _ _

The Rev. Mr. RonnE ft, Secretary, read. the Report; and
on the motion of Mr. 4.-GIPPs, it was referred to a Commit-
tee of the Gentlemen who drew, it up to prepare an abridgment
for publication in the papers. We shall, therefore, content:
ourselves at present with stating:, that the Report was heard.
With lively feelings of pleasure and approbation.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said, the statement just
read was highly satisfactory, and the result of great magnitude
.and importance ' • and, when the smallness of the sum expended,
and the general benefits derived, were taken into consideration.
he thought he might defy the whole world to produce an in-
stance where so much good had been done at so trifling an ex-
pence. His Grace then stated, that, under existing circum-
stances, it was not deemed advisable, or necessary, to apply at
present to the piihlic for further aid.
Lord KENYON moved the thanks of the Meeting to his
Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury. The motion was carried
with acclamations.

Thanks were also voted to the Rev. Mr. Bramwell, to the
Auditors of the Society, to the Acting Secretary, the Rev. Mr.
W. J. ltodber, and the Vice-Presidents and Members of the'
Committee, the Trustees and Treasurer.. These motions were
carried unanimously. •
Mr. J. WATSON was then elected a Trustee, in the room of
Mr. Beeston Low, deceased.
Mr. CRANE called the attention of the Society to the Church.
Briefs Bill now before Parliament.- lie wished the attention of
the Meeting to be turned towards it, in order that in its pro-
gress any suggestion that would benefit the views of the Society
might be made to the House of Commons.

After a long conversation as to the nature of the Bill in peg-
don, Mr. CRANE moved, in effect, that the Society saould
watch the progress of the Bill, in order to render every assist-
ance in their power to make the proposed measure subservient
to the attainment of one object.

This motion was seconded by Dr. NAms, and carried una-
nimously.
The Meeting then proceeded to elect officers, &c. for -Cos
ensuing year.