The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-04 00:00:00

elltninS iint

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4, 1845.

The House of Lords met at Five o'clock,
The Indemnity Bill was read a tF.,rd time.
On the motion of Lord r,aOIIGRAM the Small Debts
Bill was recommittr:'.

The adi:Lrned debate on the Maynooth Bill was then
ase.:ded by the Earl of HARDWICKE.

The Ho►►se was afterwards addressed by the Earl
of CARNARVON, the Marquis of NORNANBY, the Arch-
bishop of DUBLIN, Lord DE Roos, and Lord BROUGHAM,
all in favour of the Bill. The Bishop of EXETER alone
opposed it. Ultimately, the debate was adjourned.
The House of Commons met at Four o'Clock.
After the transaction of private business, Mr. RUNE
moved " That an humble address be presented
to her MAJESTY, that she will be graciously pleased
to grant such a pension as she may think proper to the
Right Hon. Sir H. POTTINGER, Bart., K.C.8., as a
reward for his eminent public services, and especially
for having, as her MAJESTY'S Plenipotentiary in China,
brought the war in that country to a conclusion by a
peace alike honourable and advantageous ; and to as-
sure her MAJESTY that the House will make good the
same.

Lord SANDON seconded the motion, which was sup.
ported by Sir J. HOBHOUSE.

Sir R. PEEL, on the part of the Government, although
disapproving of motions of this nature, would certainly
take upon himself the responsibility of advising her
MAJESTY to make a provision for this distinguished

After a few observations from Lord J. RUSSELL,
Lord PALMERSTON, Mr. J. ABEL SMITH, Mr. Ross,
and Mr. P. HOWARD, the resolution was agreed to
nemine contradicen te.

Mr. WARD then moved for " a Select Committee to
inquire whether there are any peculiar burdens specially
affecting the landed interest of this country, or any pe-
culiar exemptions enjoyed by that interest, and to as-
certain their nature and extent."

After a somewhat lengthened debate, the motion was
negatived by a majority of 73 ; and the other orders of
the day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at
a Quarter to One.

Want of room prevents us from doing justice to the
excellent speeches made in the House of Lords last
evening on the Maynooth Bill, but they cannot be
passed over without notice. They displayed a liberal
and humane spirit, just views of government, and,
with one exception, an absence of sectarian feeling
highly honourable to the Upper House. The Arch-
bishop of DUBLIN spoke out like a man who, in
defence of truth and justice, sets calumny and
bigotry at defiance. He rebuked the modern
Pharisees, who look upon themselves and their
religion as perfect, and admonished them to take
the beam out of their own eyes that they might see
clearly the beam in their brother's eye. "Rather," said he,
"than resort to violence in turning men from their errors,
I would descend from my station, and earn my bread by
the most menial employment. I would not resort to
violence, but I would endeavour to drive out from our
own Church those who taught false doctrines—who held
the doctrines of one Church, and received the emolu-
ments of another." The cheers which followed must
have sounded harshly on the ears of certain Prelates
It is a favourable symptom of the feeling
which prevails in the House of Peers, that only one
Member last night spoke against the measure—the
Pus' yite Bishop of EXETER, who, in his usually polite
and Christian language, denominated Maynooth " a
perjury-teaching college." Lord BROUGHAM'S speech
may be read with advantage by the most violent op-
ponents of the measure, and especially by certain Dis-
senters and the members of the Free Church of Scotland.
They will find that his Lordship's remarks wofully correct
when they have any favours to ask of the Episcopal
Beach. " The Dissenters and Wesleyan Methodists "
said he, " were the loudest and most incessant in their
outcry against it. Well might the bench of Bishops
say, that these religionists had no right to look for an
extension of civil and religious liberty for themselves, since
they had been so violent in their opposition when con-
cessions were made to Roman Catholics. They were
the last, too, who should charge other religionists with
holding persecuting doctrines, for, if he selected a writer
who, of all others, laid down the doctrine of extirpation
with more elaborateness—who even went so far as to
say that the body of the heretic should even be burnt—
who taught not merely the right but the duty of destroy-
ing the body to save the soul—he should say that that
man was JOHN CALVIN."

According to intelligence from Mexico, of the Ist of
May, it was understood, in well-informed quarters, that
the Government were disposed to recognise the inde-
pendance of Texas, on the condition that it should not
be incorporated with the United States. Propositions
to this effect had been made by Texas, and it had been
communicated to the Mexican Congress by the New Pre-
sident
and the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The fol-
lowing resolution of the President in coui,cil bad been
submitted to the Chambers :

" The Government is authorised to give hearing to the
propositions which have been made to it respecting Texas,
and proceed to an arrangement or celebration of a treaty use-
ful and honourable to the republic, keeping the Congress ac-
quainted with what is done tor its examination and approval."
Should the Congress reply in the affirmative, the total
separation of Texas from Mexico will be completed, and,
in two or three years, it will be installed, with due
solemnity, as one of the States of the American Union.

According to accounts from Madrid of the 27th ult.,
the despotic conduct of NARVAEZ towards the editors of
the Clamor Publico, as well as other proceedings of an
equally arbitrary character, had caused great public
excitement, and di pressed the funds nearly one per
cent. All the papers, with the exception of the
Heraldo, which is under the influence of the Govern-
ment, condemned in the strongest terms the arrest mad
deportation, without trial, of CORRADI and CALVO; and
the Castellano and Globo cautioned the Ministry against
pursuing a course which might lead to most deplorable
results. By a new law, it appears all journals are to be
submitted to the censorship of the Political Chief three
hours before publication, and for a breach of
this law, which we certainly never heard of,
the editor of the Espectadar had been sub-
jected to a fine of 3,000 reals (30L) It was said
that news had been received of other arbitrary pro-
ceedings hi the provinces, and that three respectable
merchants, named GUARDIOLA, VERGES, and BALDRICK,
had been arrested at Barcelona. According to the Eco
del Comercio fourteen persons altogether had been ar•
rested at that place, and thirty more were destined for
the same fate. NARVAEZ, having got rid of the Cortes,
seems determined to rule the country entirely by mili-
tary law, and provoke another reaction in that unfor-
tunate country.

The Bourse was greatly agitated by the intelligence,
and the Funds declined considerably on the 27th, the
Three per Cents. closing at 33 for cash, and 33i at 60
days; the Five per Cents. at 23i for cash, and at 60
days; and the Coupons at 27i for cash.

The Paris papers are occupied with the new treaty
for the suppression of the slave-trade, the arrest of the
Madrid editors, and the abdication of Don CARLOS. All
of them condemn the conduct of the Spanish Cabinet
towards the press. The Journal des Debats descries it
as an act of arbitrary power, and as totally incompre-
hensible, when it is recollected that it took place only
the day after the promulgation of a constitution, embo-
dying clauses which especially provide against such an
abuse of authority; and the other Government journal,
the Globe, expresses utter astonishment at the strange
proceeding. The other papers, almost without exception,
concur in regarding the arrest, uader the circumstances
stated, as despotic and illegal in the highest degree. The
Opposition journals seem not at all satisfied with the
new treaty. M. TRIERS' jcurnal infers that it has been
purchased at a high price, namely, by France en-
gaging to take part with England against America
in the affair of Texas ; and the National says, " The
treaty may be sufficiently convenient for the British Ca-
billet, but it appears to be rather insolent towards our
Chambers. Consider the situation in which it will be
placed. No doubt a demand will be made for supplies to
fit out twenty-seven ships of war, and the motive for de-
manding those supplies must be discussed. But to what
purpose can there be a debate on the subject ? We admit
theright with which the KLM. iShlre,tett by the charter to
sign treaties. but the right of refusing the supplies con-