The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-27 00:00:00

COUNTY COURTS BILL.

Lord SHAFTESBURY proposed the third reading of
this Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM said he believed this Bill to be a
step in the right direction.
Lord COTTENHAM complained that a number of new
officers would hare to be appointed, and others would bk;
displaced who would require compensation.
'1 he Bill was then read a third time and passed.
CUSTOMS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee.
SLAVERY.

Lord BROUGHAM said he had given notice that he
should submit a proposition to the house upon the sub-
ject of slavery this evening. In the absence of his
Learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor), however, he
should postpone his proposition till Monday next ; at the
same time, he thought it right to state that he could not
consent to postpone it beyond that period.
The Exchequer Bills Preparation Bill went through
Committee.

The Drainave (Ireland) Bill was reported, on the mo-
tion of Lord Wharncliffe, and ordered to be read a third
time on Thursday.
The Double Costs Bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed on Thursday.
The Fisheries (Ireland) Bill, was read a second time
and ordered to be committed on Friday,
The Mines and Collieries Bill was reported.
The other Bills on the table were fora arded a stage,
and their LordshipS- adjourned till . Thursday, at Ten
o'Clock.

HOUSE OF COMMOJVS, July 26.
PORTUGUESE ARMY.

Mr. LABOUCHEBE wished to ask the Right
Hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury, whe-
ther he could hold. out any hopes of any payment
being made to the unfortunate officers and soldiers
who served in the army in Portugal.
Sir R. PEEL said that in conducting the com-
munications with foreign Governments, he had
had to contend in a more than ordinary
degree with the impediments which arose from
changes of Governments. That impediment existed in
Portugal. The new Ministers professed naturally
enough that they were overwhelmed with business,
and required a little time to consider the matter. He
had the satisfaction, however, to state that he believed
that provisions were making for the payment of those
people by half-yearly instalments. .Of course there
would be a question as to the claims of those which
would be adjudicated upon.
Mr. BROTHERTON wished to say one word
with respect to the erection of monuments in testimo-
nials to warriors. He believed that as long as
they honoured warriors they would keep war itself'
in fashion, and he was anxious to see more Members
in that House who were disposed to cultivate the arts
of peace. He knew that sentiment was very
unpopular, but he could not refrain from entering his
protest against honouring men whom he conceived to
be unworthy of honour.
The amendments were then agreed to.
REV. 11. MELVILL.

Mr. HENRY KIiAIBLE said he hupEd that
he might be allowed to vindicate the character
of a near and dear relative, upon whom he con-
ceived an asprsion had been thrown by the Honour-
able Gentleman opposite (Mr. N. Gibson) in the
speech which he had made upon his motion inquiring
into the distress of the country, the Rev. Henry
Melvin. He did not believe that the
Honourable Gentleman meant to say any-
thing prejudicial to the character of that
gentleman, but at the same time he thought his views
might , receive an unfavourable construction. It
might appear from the Hon. Gentleman's speech that
he was a mere political parson, whose object it
was to ingratiate bimself with the Government
by supporting their measures.—(Hear.) In the
course of his speech, the Honourable Member
quoted very largely from a sermon of the Reverend
Gentleman, which had been reported in a publication
called The Pulpit. Ni,w, In ttiougbt it baldly tam that an
individual should be trade responsible tor sentnnetits
which were published without any authority. lie did

uot offer any opinion as to its correctm ss or inverts ct-
Less, but it was quite possible, from the manner in
which the work was reponed, dint erroneous stateh.ents
le;glit be conveyed. But, be that as it -might, he ven-
tured to say, that eo man was more capable of defending*.
or less likt ly to shirk from any -statements that he had '
uttered, than the Rev. Gentleman. lie begged to say,
that the allusions made to the Corn-laws were mostly
incidental, occurring in a sermeu;--4ich was preached
with no view to pubheation ; that they oct!urred in a sermon
which was preached in behalf of the distressed manufac-
turers ; and that, as a proof that there was no want
of, sympathy or zeal on the part of the Rev. Gentleman
in advocating their cause, the result of that one sermon
was a coLection of more than two hundred and thirty
pounds.—. (Hear.) The Hon. Member, in the course of his
observations, -represented his Rev. Friend as a man in
cloee connection with her Majesty's Government. He
did not know that it would be any disgrace to him if
such were the fact, but lie believed the only fitundation
for the statement was the fact, that he had been ap-
pointed by the Duke of Wellington to the Chaplainship
of the T.;wer, and though he highly estimated that ap-
peintment, as comiLg from so illustrious an individual,
it was totally unsoliciteci on his part, and the pecuniary •
advantage 14 hich he derived from it , was exceedingly
limited. With respect to the statement that the clergy
were interested in supporting the Corn-laws, he begged
to state that Mr. Melvill derived none, of his emolu-
ments nom tithes, the chapel of which he was the mi-
nister being conducted on that principle which was so dear
to Hun. Members opposite, namely, the voluntary prin-
ciple. It was not fur him to say whether or not it was
right for clergymen to interfere with po itics, but cer-
tainly no man could be more free from the charge of im-
properly interfering with politics than the Rev. -Henry
Melvill. He ventured to say that he had never attended
any political meetings whatever ; that he had never
engaged in any political controversies ; any reflection,
therefore, upon his character -on such grounds was
extremely unjust.—(Hear, hear.) •
Mr. Ai. GIBSON said he could assure the lion.
Gentleman that he had not the least intention to cast
any injurious reflection on the character of the Rev. Mr.
The language which he had used was rather
eulogistic of his character than otherwise. He lied
spoken of him as a distinguished and talented clergyman,
deservedly enjoying the confidence of his congregation ;
he scarcely knew, in fact, how he could have expressed
himself in terms of higher approval. With regard to the
publication called The Pulpit, he begged to submit to
the Hon. Member whether the point to be considered
was not rather the accuracy of the report, than whether
the sermon was or was not published under authority.
Ile believed that the work from which he had quoted
contained as nearly as possible a verbatim report of the
sermon of the Rev..H. Melvill. He did not understand
the Hon. Gentleman to dispute its accuracy. He must
take that opportunity of saying that he thought, as a
general rule, that House had a right to complain of doc-
trines propounded in the pulpit by. the clergymen of the
Established Church ; and that if political eco-
nomy was to be taught in the pulpit, they
ought to take some steps for securing that the doc-
trine should be sound. (Laughter.) Ile begged
to assure the lion. Gentleman that he had no ivish to
speak of the Rev. Gentleman's personal character in
this respect, and he would be very sorry to say anything
of him which could, in the smallest' degree, wound his
feelings. But Mr. Melvin, •in his p.,ipit, and as a
minister of the Church of England, was public property,
and was responsible to that House and to the country for
the doctrines which he preached.--e(Criesof " No, no,"
and laughter.) Then what became of the connexion
between Church and State 2—(Hear, hear.) Was the
-ecclesiastical or the civil power to be uppermost ?. He
thought it was a misapplication of the funds of the Church
to make its pulpits a means of supporting the Corn-laws,
and teaching the political views ofAy particular party.
He said they were employing public
.pibperty in doing
so. '1 hose on his side of the House employed lecturers
to teach their views of the Corn-laws, and the other side
might do the .same.—(Hear, hear.) They might employ
lecturers from their private funds, and print and circu-
late tracts to support their views, but he not think
they ought to sunc.ion the clergy of the Established
Church in supporting their views of the Corn laws, and
their systt m of political eeonomy,(Hear hear.) He
did not think any person could denier to IL, soundness
of the viers he then laid down.,, He would adhere to
the opinion he laid down respecting Mr. Melvill's ser-
mon. To say the least of it, he thought it was indiscreet,
and when he made allusion to the cleigy having a peen.
niary interest, he begged to remind the Hon. Gentleman
that he did not say Mr. Melvill had any pecuniary in.
terest in supporting the Corn-laws, but what he said was,
that if the clergy maintained 'the Corn-laws from the
pulpit, their congregations may ask themselves if they
had not an interest in supporting them. Mr, Melvill was
a person of weight and influence, and therefore his
opinions wire of more importance. He did not think it
was any slur upon Mr. Melvin, to be in the confidence
of her Majesty's Government, and his appointment to the
chaplaincy of the Tower was a proof of that. He Lad not
the slightest intention of casting any reflection on the re-
lative of the Hon. Gentleman.

Sir It. INGLIS said that having been appealed to by
the Hon. Gentleman he begged to say- he did not see
what would be the use of articles of political economy to
the clergy of the EStablished Church. Articles of poli-
tical economy made by the present Louse of Commons
would not, he conceived, be much respected by the Hon.
Gentleman. He denied the position laid down by the
Hon. Gentleman that the clergy were responsible to that
House.—(llear.)

The conversation then dropped.
COLONIAL PASSENGERS BILL.

' Lord STANLEY moved the Order of the Day for
H the third reading of the Colonial Passengers Bill. The
Bill having been read a third time, UR the question that
the Bill do pass,
• ' Mr. HAWES moved that the 811{ clause be struck
out. He hoped to have not only the consent •,f the
House, but of many of the MeMbera of - her Majesty's
Government to that motion. Last year a similar clause
had been proposed. by the then Secretary to the Colonies
in bringing forward a measure on this subject, and that
clause heti been opposed by the Noble Lord the present
Secretary for the Colonies, .by the-present Secretary to
the Board of Control, by the presunt.First Lord of the
Treasury, by the Secretary to the . Treasury, by a Right
Honourable Gentleman now absent, the. Secre-
tary of State fur the home Department, who
, had all been anxious to avail themselves of
the casual assistance of those who differed
from them in political opinion, to oppose the then Go-
vernment as far as regarded that uwasate. The objec-
tion then taken to the measure was that there had been
no definite plan for regulating the transportation of these
Hill Coolies, and that was precisely the objection he
(Mr. Hawes) took to the present measure. He could not
but contrast the conduct of the termer Secretary for the
Colonies (Lord J. Russell) with that of the present
(Lord Stanley.) The former Noble Lord-had not in-
troduced his measure until Paiaament had had a fill
ooportunity of discussing the subject ; while the present
Secretary for the Coloniea had introduced the measure
without any discussson, and had it not been that certain
papers had been movedfor, the Bill, under the till of the
Colonial Passengers Bill, might have passed without dis-
cussion. The Noble Lc-rd had objected to the measure
of Lord John Russell, that there was no definite plan for
regulating the deportation of the Hill Coolies, and that
was precisely his (Mr. Hawes') objection to the mea-
sure of the Noble Lon'', and he would ask the Noble
Lord what plan had been propounded on that subject
since the measure of Lord John Russell ? Had the
Noble Lord any plan—had he indicated any ? Cer-
tainly not. The Noble Lord had certainly written a
most remarkable despatch on the subject, and that was
all he had done. It would have been wise to have sub-
mitted to the House the conditions the Indian Govern-
ment had .entered into as the reason for passing the Bill,
and they had a right
.to know whether those conditions
had been fulfilled. 'He thought the Noble Lord ought to
wait till he had the assent of the Indian Government
and the Government of the Mauritius to the measure.
In these statements he was not saying a word against a
system.of emigration conducted upon proper principles.
If they could accomplish justice to parties emigrating
to the Mauritius, he should not object to the emi-
gration of Hilt Coolies, but he contended that
so desirable an end could not be obtained. He
did not make that statement solely upon his own
authority, because he found Lord Normanby stating, in
1839, that the Government was - decidedly hostile to any
project for removing emigrants from the Mauritius ;
and again, Lord Auckland had stated, in a despatch, that
he feared such a systkm could not be carried out with-
out inflicting grievous injustice and fraud on a helpless
people. Lord Auckland had said that no police regu-
lations would .ever be sufficient protection to the negroes
in the Mauritius. The negroes were not provided with
hospitals, and their living was extremely- bad, and they
were generally very badly treated, and their complaints
about the non-payment of wages were often passed by
without notice. It could not be said that it was neces-
sary to send labourers to the -Mauritius with a view to
the increased production of sugar. There had been no
falling off in the production of sugar in the Mauritius,
and there could not, therefore, be any necessity
for the importation of labourers into the colony.
He contended that if they passed the present measure,
they would run the risk of a renewal of al.:very, that
they could not adequately protect those poer people from
fraud and oppremion. He entreated the. House, there-
fore, to pause before they passed the Bill, and to wait
at least until they should receive further information on
the subject. "lie lion. Member concluded, be moving
the alteration of certain words, which would virtually
defeat the object of the Bill.
The motion having been seconded,
Mr. G. BANKES supported the Bill. He was per-
suaded that the time was come, when they should !To•
vide for a fresh supply of laiaatrers in our 11 est India
colonies ; and he believed there was t.o quarter
from which that supply could be so eenveniently
or advantageously derived as frem the East Indies.
There were but two sources of inanigration to which
the West Indies could look for a supply, and those
sources wet e, the one the coast of Afrieu, and the other
the East of Asia. They haul has: the twidet,ee r.f tit Chas.
Metcalf, who had bussed many it
•in high
office in the East hulk:, tn.d who In‘d suustqu« tidy
been Governor of-Jwiuti.,.., ii,equottly, was
well acquainte %%LI) the social posiion of both coun-
tries, to prove that there could be no objection to -the
introduction- of labourers front the East Indies into the
West Indies, except the length of the voyage, and that
difficulty the Legislature would speedily remove. The
present Bill, it appeared, did not provide for a supply of
labourers to the West Italics, but he hoped
that a Bill would be introduced for that pur-
Pse early in the next session of Parliament.
As respected the Mauritius, he was nut so• qualified to
give an opinion ; but as respected Jamaica, lie thought
he might venture to say that the result of all their in-
quiries was, that there wits no feur of oppression to per-
sous w this deseripOen. Vs Len diey t:rP introduced
as labourers they w (Add be ie the inancoiate enj,:ymeot.i
of equal rights and privileges with those! freed men who I ,