The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-03 00:00:00

NEW ZEALAND.

Sir R. INGLIS said, that notwithstanding that he had
seen that certain communications had taken place between
her Majesty's Government and the authorities of New Zea.
land upon the subject of a notice that an lion. Member had
upon the paper, which had indeced that lion. Member to
withdraw that notice, still, seeing that Right Hon. Gentleman
the secretary of State for the Colonies in his place, he would
put to him, now in public, a question he had previously asked
him in private, namely, whether the communicw,i,,r-s Chet had
taken place were of such a nature as to alter the position of
the mi►sionaries of that colony with this et untry ; and also
the position of the natives of the colony and the New Zcahnd
Company with this country, and that of those partits with each
other?

Mr. HOPE said he felt it necessary to give some explana-
tion with respect to what had passed last nielit. He d d not
pretend to say what had passed between the Noble Lord under
whom he served and the Hon. :tlember for Liskeard. In the
first place, the withdrawal of the notice of the Ilslnourable
Member was wholly unsolicited on the part of her
Majesty's Government, who were about to justify their
conduct with respect to the missionaries. From the manner in
which it reached the press, it would appear that the measure
was more fully before the Government than was the case.
The fact was this, that the Noble Lord at the head of the Colo.
nial Department heard from the New Zealand Company that
an arrangement would be submitted to him for
his consideration. He answered that whenever such an
arrangement should be proposed in a proper manner, he
would give it his consideration. No such alteration had yet been
made or decided on with respect to the New Zealand Com-
pany. He should, however, state that there was no compro-
mise whatever on the part of her Majesty'. Government.
In answer to a question put by Lord DUNCAN,
Sit: R. PEEL said that his Noble Friend at the head of the
Commisston of the Woods and Forests had a Bill in prepara-
tion containing certain salutary regulations. He wished the
Noble Lord would postpone his question until the resuming of
business after WhitsuntitZe.
THE BRAZILS.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that he saw in the public papers
a statement that the Brazilian Government had recommended
the Brazilian merchants to impose 20 per cent. on cotton goods,
as long as their sugar was distinguished in duty from other
colonial sugars. His question to the Right Hon. Gentleman
was, whether the Government had receives! any communica-
tion on this subject, anti whether such information affirmed
or denied the statement?

Sir R. PEEL said he felt confident that no official information
had been received on the subject to which the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman referred. If the Right Hon. Gentleman had given him
notice of the question, he would have been prepared to answer
it ; but, as far as he knew, no such official information had been
received.
HOLYHEAD HARBOUR AND RAILWAY.
Mr. HUME put a question (as we understood it) relative
to the sale of Holyhead Harbour for railway purposes. Folk-
stone Harbour had been sold, and he feared that all the har-
bours would eventually meet the same fate.
Mr. YORKE replied that he thought the question a•proper
one, and would have the informa:ity erased from the Bill.
Mr. COLLETT wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, respecting a motion which
stood on the book for that day. The Right Honourable Gen-
tleman intended to add the name of Mr. Milnes Gaskell to the
five members already named, as a Committee on the Chester
and Holyhead Railway ; did be mean that the Committee
should consist of six members, or that Mr. Gaskell should be
substituted for another Honourable Member?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he did
not intend to persevere in the motion.
SCOTCH BANKING, AND SCOTCH POOR-LAWS.
Mr. FOX MAULE wished to know when the second
reading would take place of the Scottish Banking Bill, and
the Scottish Poor-law Bill ?
Sir ROBERT PEEL said it would be necessary to take
some votes of supply on Monday, but he hoped to move the
second reading of those Bills before the holida3s.
SCHISM IN THE CHURCH.

Mr. MANGLES said he had a petition to present respecting
he difference which had lately occurred amongst the clergy of
..he Church of England. He understood that it was not
competent for him to present this petition, but he wished to
found a question upon it. The petitioners deeply regretted the
strife and discord which at present existed in the Church of
England, in consequence of an attempt to revive obso-
lete ceremonies. They stated that the disputes had
arisen in consequence of conscientious scruples entertained by
both parties. Many of the clergy of the country considered
it their duty to revive certain ceremonies, and wear certain
dresses which had not been in use in those parts of the country.
On the other hand, the parishioners said that neither they
nor their fathers were accustomed to these ceremonies, and
they strongly and strenuously objected to their introduction.
The result had been that a great deal of bad feeling had been
created. The petitioners prayed that some measure
might be introduced to restore harmony. The question
he wished to put was, whether it was the intention of her
Majesty's Government, either by Act of Parliament, or by
means of the dignitaries of the Church, to take any measures
to set these disputed points at rest ?
Sir ROBERT PEEL—I do recollect, Sir, that the Hon.
Gentleman, several days since, mentioned this subject. I
am not prepared to give an assurance with respect to any in-
terference on the part of the Executive Government with re-
spect to the matter to which the Hon. Gentleman has referred.
In answer to a question from an Hose. MEMBER on the
Opposition side of the House,
Mr. MACKINNON said that in answer to the question

put by the Hen. Member, as to whether he intended to bring
forward his measure rela•ive to interment in towns, he had to
say that, after the assurance given him by the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of the Government, that a similar mea-
sure would be brought forward at an after period, he should
postpone it. He would rather that the Bill were brought in
by the Government than by a private individual, and under
these circumstances he should postpone the bringirg forward of
his measure.