The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-02 00:00:00

that was to say, it did not, get rid of them by any special
enactment, but it bets! out a strong probability of their abo.
lition, by their being the inducement of a rem-in-non interest to
substitute leases for ninety-nine years, instead of leases on
lives and fines upon renewals. Nor was there anything in it
inconsistent with the public interest, as there was a strong
disposition to prefer a lease of ninety-nine years, which was
almost a certainty, to a lease on lives, which was subject to uncer-
tainty. The public had the deepest interest in the most advanta-
geous management of this property. There was no public interest
militating against this measure. With respect to the Eeccle-
siastical portion of the question, there were four sources of re-
' venue to which they could look. First, there was the Bishop's
fund. The incomes of the Bishops were fixed prospectively,
and as the Bishops fell iii—a maximum income having been
fixed—under this Bill any surplus revenue that mi&lit arise
after the deaths of the present incumbents would be applicable
to ecclesiastical purposes, subject only to the rent-charge of the
succeeding Bishops. Then with regard to the diaconal and
capitular property; there were four Chapters at present in
this respect in precisely the same category as the Bishops, and
these were the Chapters of Westminster, of St. Paul's, of
Manchester,
_and of Durham. Any future augmentation
in the value of the property of those Chapters
would be available to ecclesiastical purposes; that
was to say, to the augmentation of small livings, or to
the endowment of new churches, subject to the rent-charge
of the incumbents. He I.ropnsed, by the present Bill, to ex-
tend that rule to the other Chapters, and he would introduce a
clause to that effect.—( Hear, hear.) He thcught the prin-
ciple ought to be extended to all. Having disposed of the
episcopal and the diaconal and capitular fund, he now came
to the corporations sole, the rectories, and Vicarages. He
was told that many of these incumbents were vicars in large
towns, having cures ill-endowed ; but considering that a con-
siderable portion of the property rendered improvable by this
Bill might be budding ground of great value in the neighbour-
hood of large towns ;. and fearing lest, by the operation of this
Bill, he aught be creating in the midst of a large town, having
a dense population, where there was a great deficiency of
spiritual instruction, a cure that should be over.endowed, he
had taken what he trusted would be found be an effectual pre-
caution against the occurrence of such an event. He had, for
that purpose, introduced a proviso, that where the population
exceeded 2,000 the income should not be more than 6001. a year;
that where the population did not exceed 1,000, the income
should not exceed SW/. a year; and that where the population
was below 1,000, the income should not exeeed 3001. a year ;
and that any surplus should go to the general fund for im-
proving small livings, or for endowing additional churches,
the immediate neighbourhood of the property to have the pre-
ference over districts in the distribution of the surplus. He
thought that this Bill was calculated to carry out the principle
advocated by the Right Hon. Gentleman in common with
himself, namely, that the Church herself should devote the
whole surplus of her property to ecclesiastical purposes con •
fleeted with the pastoral care of the people before she applied
to the State for that purpose. The Right Hon. Gentleman
himself admitted that that was the best purpose to which this
surplus could be appropriated, with the exception of one which
he (Mr. Vernon Smith) thought perfectly legitimate, but
which he (Sir J. Graham) could not think so, and which the
Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. V. Smith) candidly confessed he
at present did not think it prudent to press. He (Sir J.
Graham), therefore, earnestly recommended the Bill to the at-
tention of the House, as a measure calculated to place at the
disposal of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, to be used for
strictly ecclesiastical purposes, the largest possible amount of
revenue.
Mr. HAWES said that undoubtedly the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had made some considerable and moat important
changes in the Bill, which he (Mr. Hawes) looked upon as
great concessions. There was one point, however, on which
he wished to be satisfied. Was any portion of that fund thus
created to be diverted into the hands of any private parties,
either lay or ecclesiastical, after the present incumbents should
have fallen in ? If it were, the Bill would not have his con-
sent; if it were not, he would no longer oppose the measure.
The House ought to have a clear assurance on that head.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM explained, that although in his
speech he had stated there were four sources from which this in-
crease of revenue was to be derived, he had yet omitted to men-
tion the fourth source, which was the sinecure rectories; and
the whole of the increased revenue derivable from these four
sources, subject to the charges to which he had already alluded,
would under the provisions of this Bill be available for eccle-
siastical purposes, and go to the augmentation of the general
fund.
Mr. HENLEY said that the holders of Church Leases had
no idea that, under this Bill, an end was to be put to their
leases. They were in p.rfect ighorance of what was preparing
for them, and he did not think a measure of that importance
should be pressed forward at such a late period of the session.
If it were pressed to a division he should vote against the Bill
being committed this session.
Mr BROTHERTON thought the Bill ought to be post-
poned. It was professedly for the advantage of the Church, but
it was really for the advantage of the holders of Church property.
Mr. VERNON SMITH would not, after the ample con-
cessions which had been made by the Right Hon. Baronet, and
the explanations which he had given, press his motion to a
division.
The motion was then withdrawn, the Report was brought up,
and the Bill ordered to he read a third time on Friday.
CANADA LOAN BILL.

This Bill was read a second time.
The Slavery ( East Indies) Bill was read a second time.
COUNTY COURTS BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this Bill,
Mr. HENLEY said he did not wish to offer any objection to
the second reading of the Bill, but he objected to the novel
principle which was proposed to be introduced into the Bid, of
taking the verdict upon the majority of the jury, instead of the
unanimous verdict of the jury.
Captain PECH ELL hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would
give consideration to the claims fur compensation of the Judges
of Small Debts Courts.
The Bill was then read a second time and ordered to be
committed on Friday.
LAW OF EVIDENCE BILL.

The committal of this Bill was postponed till Friday next,
BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS (No. 2) BILL.
On the motion for the further consideration of the Report
on this 13111, _

Mr. HANVES proposed a clause for the purpose of providing
against treating and head-money.
Mr. HARDY said he thought the elause was unnecessary,
as the common law, as it at present stood, provided that any
treating given to voters after the test of the writ and before
its return voided the election. He would appeal to the Learned
Solicitor-General to know if this was not a correct view of the
law as it at present stood.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that under the present
law any treating whatever after the test of the writ rendered
the election void, and would unseat the Member. But he ap-
proved of this clause, as he thought it a valuable improvement
to the Bill.

Mr.'-AGLIONBY said that there was one principle recog-
nised in this Bill to which he had great objection, and that was
supplying out-voters with refreshments. He did not know
whether it was possible to get rid of this practice, but he thouhgt
that a candidate ought no more to give such refreshments to
out-voters than he ought to ply for ribands and colours.
Mr. CURTEIS thought that those candidates who paid
for the refreshments were sure to get the votes.—(Laughter.)
Mr. HENLEY thought the House ought to decide what
was legal treating and what was not. It was now a mere
matter of chance as to what would be decided by a Committee
to be treating. He thought the House ought to look the par-
ties boldly in the face, and say what was legal and what was
not.—( Hear, hear.) In county elections, where electors came
from a distance, lie thought they ought to have moderate re-
freshment supplied to them.
Mr. STRUTT thought the Hon. Gentleman ought to state
what moderate refreshment was, and whether it was porter, or
gin and water, or roast beef, or bread and cheese.
After a few words from the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, in
explanation, the clause was agreed to.
On the next clause bei,ig brought up, the object of which
was to prevent the payment of head-money before, during, or
after any election,
Mr. HARDY objected to the words "before, during, or
after," and suggested that the words " before and after " should
be struck out, and that the clause should stand " the payment
of any valuable sum of money, &c.," after any election.
Sir R. I'EEL did not think it would be advisable to leave
out the words " before and after," though he could not tee
the use of inserting all the words "before, during, and after."
They included all time. It was impo.sible to conceive any
time that was not either before, during, or after an election.—
( Hear, hear.) Would it not be better to let it stand, " the
payment of any valuable sum of money, &c., shall be deemed
bribery ?"
Mr. AGLIONBY hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet
would not object to the words, " before, during, or after."
After some further conversation the clause was agreed to.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved a proviso at the
end of the 4th clause, to the effect that any alleged act of
bribery must be shown to be committed within three months
of the presentation of the petition, previous to its becoming
subject of inquiry bef re the Committee.—Agreed to.
Some verbal amendments were made in the other 'clauses,
) and the House resumed. The Report was brought up and
agreed to.—Third reading this day.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.
Sir J. GRAHAM moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the
purpose of better defining the boundaries of the borough of Co-
ventry, rendered necessary by a recent judgment in the Court of
Exchequer, which leaves the borough with one actual and two
possible boundaries, inducing much confusion and difficulty in
the administration of justice between the county and city. He
stated that the town council of the borough had agreed to the
arrangements of the Bill.
Leave was given to bring in the Bill.
EXCHEQUER BILLS.
Mr. MASTERMAN asked whether the Chancellor of the.
Exchequer had received any Report from the Commissioners
appointed to inquire into the Exchequer Bills fraud, and when it
would be laid before the House ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
not as yet received the Report, but was led to expect it in the
course of the ensuing week, and as soon as it came into his
hands it should be laid before the House. He understood that
the evidence was very voluminous.
The Howe adjourned at One o'Clock.