The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-31 00:00:00

that the building was the parish church of the Parliament. '
The speaker of their House, and all Members who chose to ac-
company him, once a year attended public worship there, and
it was for that reason that peculiar privileges were attached to
it, which ought not lightly to be withheld.
Captain OSBORNE hoped the Hon. Member (Mr. Borth-
wick) would press his opposition to a division, an l he for one
would vote with him, and that upon the statement of the
Chancellor of the Exchequet, for it was evident th It that Hon.
Member's private opinion was against the church, though as
Chancellor of the Exchequer he naturally asked where was the
money to come from for its substitute.
Mr. HINDL EY suggested the postponement of the vote.
Lord SANDON defended the vote, considering the state of
religious education and instruction in the country. He could
not consent to any course that would interfere with the appli-
cation of funds for such purposes as those set forth. He would
set himself against the feeling so generally expressed by the
House. _

Mr. J. A. SMITH supported the postponement of the vote.
After a few words from Lord SAN DON and Mr. OSBORNE,

Mr. SHELL wished to know if ever her Majesty's Ministers,
or the Members of the House, attended St. Margaret's
church ?—(Laughter.) It was his impression that it was very
rarely used by them. He considered St. Margaret's church
was an eye-sure to the neighbourhood, and materially inter-
fered with the view of the Abbey. It would also interfere
with the view of that magnificent building they were now
erecting. It would be highly improper that they should sacri-
fice 800,000/. for the conservation of that, the removal of
which would only cost 40,0001., and which affected so much
the beauty of the neighbourhood.
Mr. HAWES objected to the church of St. Margaret's
being considered an eye-sore. He generally agreed with the
Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool.
Mr. OSBORN E explained. He thought that they should
remove any ob'tacle that would mar th 4 general effect of the
great public buildings in this locality.
Sir J. GRAHAM agreed with the Noble Lord the Member
for Liverpool, and with the remarks made by the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He considered
the repairs ought to be provided for, and he did not think a
more economic sum could be named than the amount stated in
the vote.
Mr. PROTHEROE considered St. Margaret's church a
fair specimen of undecorated Gothic architecture, and if it were
removed it would display the most defective part of the Abbey.
He was of opinion that the church in question was very well
adapted for the purposes of worship. He would support the
vote.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL considered that it would be a
great advantage if the church and churchyard were removed.
He thought there would be no difficulty in getting a new site
for the church.
Mr. EsCOTT thought the church was a nuisance, and
ought to be removed.
Mr. P. BORT HWICK said he would press the motion to a
division, as he had not heard anything to alter his views on the
subject. The expense of pulling down the church and erect-
ing a new one in its stead in a more convenient site, would be
20,000/. He did not see why the churchyard should be pro-
faned by a public footway, and the funeral service disturbed by
idle smoking fellows lounging about there.
Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS said the Committee ought to
pause before they decided upon the subject. He would recom-
mend a postponement of the vote.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER declined to
accede to the suggestion of the Gallant Officer.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the vote 44
Against it l9
Majority
The vote was then agreed to.
The next vote proposed was 2,0001. for the repair of the
public statues of the metropolis.
Mr. WILLIAMS thought the statue of Cromwell should be
placed among the statues which were to adorn the new Houses
of Parliament. Few men placed in his position, and in his
time, were stained with fewer crimes. Surely the name of
Cromwell deserved as much respect in this country as that of
Napoleon to France.
Mr. HUTT jocosely observed that the eulogium of the Hon.
Member for Coventry must be gratifying to the manes of Oliver
Cromwell. He had not, however, heard that the statue of
Cromwell had been excluded from the design of the new Houses
of Parliament ; in fact, he had been informed of the contrary.
The vote was agreed to.
A vote of 1,8151. was agreed to, to defray the expenses of
certain officers in Scotland.
A vote of 6,464/. was proposed for the payment of officers of
the household of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.
Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE said that last year there had
been a great deal of discussion on this subject, and it was un-
derstood that the Government were not anxious to continue
this useless expenditure of public money. It had been even
rumoured that the present would be the last Lord Lieutenant.
He wished to know if such was the intention of Government ?
Sir. R. PEEL said he could not then, the Hon. Gentleman
having given no notice of his question, reply to it.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said he had been deterred from making
a motion on the subject, in conseqneuee of the hopes which the
Government held out of proposing the abolition of the office.
The vote was agreed to.
A sum of 39,000/. was proposed to defray the expenses of
her Majesty's foreign and other secret service.
Mr. WILLIAMS said he opposed the vote last year, and
would do so in the present year, on the same ground ; that, in
a time of peace, and when all nations were at amity with one
another, so large a sum should be employed for purposes which
properly belonged to periods of trouble and warfare. He would
move, as an amendment, that the vote be reduced to 20,000/.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion ... 9
Against it ... 56
Majority
EDUCATION IN ENGLAND
75,000/. was agreed to, without opposition, for promoting
education in Great Britain.
EDUCATION IN IRELAND.

75,0001. was next proposed to the National Board of Educa-
tion in Ireland, for the purpose of defraying the expenses of edu-
cation in connexion with it.
Mr. G. A. HAMILTON protested against the principle
involved in the vote, as it excluded other societies, having
for their object the promotion of education, from it. He did
not, however, feel it his duty to raise a discussion on its merits,
on account of the absence of Irish Members.
Mr. B. OSBORNE referred to a statement made by the
Bishop of Cashel at a meeting, in which he set forth that 75
out of every 100 of the people of Ireland could neither read
nor write. He could not charge that Right Rev. Prelate with
suggestio falsi, but with having been guilty of suppresio yeri,
as his observations could only apply to children under ten, and
not younger than five, years.
Mr. WYSE wished to know whether it was the intention of
the Government to establish any model schools in Ireland ?
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said it was the intention of the
Board of Education of Ireland to establish model schools in
certain districts in Ireland.
Mr. FITZROY hoped the grant would effect great good.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said the Board of Education in Ire-
land should be composed of persons of different sects, that they
might see that the money voted to them was properly expended.
He also hoped that they would meet in a friendly, instead of a
hostile spirit, for the purpose of promoting secular education,
and for emulating the youth of Ireland of different religious de-
nominations to a generous, not a jealous, spirit of rivalry. The
National Board of Education had done great good.
Lord C. HAMILTON had always opposed the National
Board, as he believed a better system might be adopted. The
most liberal education was imparted in the schools belonging to
the Church Education Society.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL referred to the report of a meet-
ing at which the National Board was denounced in a gross
manner by parties who were members of the Church Educa-
tion Society.
Mr. OSBORNE—When the Noble Lord asks why this was
not an united system he would tell him. The fact was because
the Protestant clergy had refused to give their attendance to
these schools, while the Ronne Catholic clergy had done their
utmost to prove that they were interested in the improvement
of the people. If the Noble Lori had thrown overboard his
consistency with regard to Maynooth, why should he not give
his consistency to the winds on other points?
Lord C. HAMILTON was quite prepared to defend his con-
.sistency on both points, but he did n think that this was the
time to enter on such a discussion.
A vote of 4,9111. was then agreed to, for defraying the ex-
penses of the School of Design, after a few words from Mr.
WILLIAMS.
It was then moved that 7,3801. be appropriated to the pay-
ment of the professors of the Scotch Universities.
Mr. SHARNIAN CRAWFORD moved the sum be re-
duced to 7,228/.
The House then divided, when there appeared:—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority against the amendment —s7
A sum of 2,1001. was then voted for the Belfast Institutien,
which was disputed on the ground of es being enormous.
Mr. HINDLEY said that he felt that though the opinions
which he represented were very Unpopular in that House,
they had a large constituency out of doors, and he therefore
felt bound to oppose the motion; but on a motion to divide
the House, Mr. Hindley said, that he saw his own movement
was fruitless, and he would accordingly withdraw it.
On the vote of 42,4001. being proposed for the British
Museum,
Mr. WYSE thought that a distinct building ought to be
appropriated to the reception of anti.lue sculptures and other
treasures of antiquity. The expense would be but little in-
creased to the country, and the advantages to the fine arts
would be invaluable. He had no desire to take up the time of
the House, but he hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would give
this subject his full consideration during the recess, as it was
his (Mr. Wyse's) intention to bring the subject before the
House during the next session.
Sir R. PEEL said that he was fully aware of the importance
of the subject adverted to by the Hon. Member, to the arts
of the country, but it would be out of the power of the Govern-
ment to accede to his proposition, as there were already so
many claims of a similar character upon them, while they had
no fund to which they might refer for such a proposition. So
averse was he to any further vote on this subject, that he would
rather assist out of his own private means, to the erection of
such a separate building for the reception of these antiquities
(if such a building were realiy required) than further to tax
the people for the support of public institutions.
Mr. PRO T H EROE did not consider with the Hon. Member
(Mr. Wy.e) that the style of the newer portion of the British
Museum was so out of character, as regarded its architecture,
that these sculptures could not be received into it ; and before
voting an increase of money for a separate building, he should
wish to know where the antiquities to fill it were to come
from.—( Laughter. )
Mr. WA RBURTON thought that such a apace would be
required for the remnants of mediaeval architecture, that
the country should not be put to the expense of providing such
erections.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK did not consider that these re.n-
vents were so numerous as the Hen. Member opposite seemed
to imagine.
After a few words from Mr. W YSE, in explanation, the vote
was agreed to.
The sum of 50,0001. in addition to the former vote of
100,0001. was then proposed for civil contingencies.
Mr. WILLIAMS objectel to that part of the vote which
comprehended the cost of excursions made by bishops in her
Majesty's ships of war. The Bishop of Gibraltar hid
brought an expense upon the country of 3101. 103. 3d., in-
cluding 1001. for travelling expenses to Lisbon, and 181. thence
to Cadiz, while the Prince of Prussia performed the ame dis-
tance at a cost of 2.51. The Bishop of Antigua also had entailed
an expense of 1471., the Bishop of Barbadoes 1891. :35., and
the Bishop of Nova Scotia 1891. 35., anti of Newfoundland
1251., making altogether a sum of somewhat about 9001. 93. 11d.,
which amount he proposed should be deducted from the vote,
as well as 1,20'1., which had been expended upon Episco-
palian clergymen in Scotland He did not see why the con•
gregations who attended upon the ministry of those ecclesias-
tics, shoal not support them in the same way that the Free
Church Ministers were supported by their congregations. He
should, therefore, decidedly oppose the granting of both these
sums.
Sir C. NAPIER said that his Hon. Friend behind seemed
to be somewhat mistaken in his statement of the manner in
which this money was expended. If it were proved that the
Bishops had gone on these excursions in the exercise of their
pdauytieasn,yhme
osrheeuthlialnnohte twhohuikldodfodseodfurcotmin
the captain
a ptsumai fromo f a th their
gth
man-
of-war under similar circumstances but if they did so for
their own pleasure, then, by all meins, he said, keep it out of
their accounts.—(Laughter. )
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained

that the expenses had been incurred in the ordinary course of
conveyance from one part of the diocese to another. If they
made mere pleasure excursions, of course the expense would be
defrayed, not out of the public, but their own private resources.
In these cases, however, he could assure the House the charges
were purely incurred in their official capacity, and were not
intended to defray the expenses of any private gratification.
Captain PECHELL said that he did not understand why
the bishops or ambassadors should charge any of these ex-
penses, because they were supplied with a very first-rate table,
and, therefore, he thought that the opposition of the Hon.
Member for Coventry to the vote was exceedingly well founded.
He observed in the estimates that the sum of 931. was charged
for the protection of the Queen of Tahiti on board the Cor-
morant. He did not object to that sum, for he thought it
very moderate. But he wished to know from whom that Queen
was protected?—( Cries of " Oh, oh.")
Sir G. COCKBURN—The Gallant Officer must be well
aware that the Queen of Tahiti was afforded protection from
the French.
Mr. SHELL objected to the vote proposed for payment to a
Mr. Ross, a reporter in the pay of a London morning paper.
That gentleman had been also employed by the Government
as a witness against Mr. O'Connell, and the other gentlemen
who were prosecuted by the State in Ireland. He did cot think
that this vote should be taken, as that gentleman represented
himself before the trial as still employed by the paper which he
had originally represented.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that, knowing that Mr. Ross had
been engaged in his official character at several of the meetings
held in Ireland, and that he had taken notes of certain speeches
there, he (Sir James Graham) had directed him to be en-
gaged as a witness on these trials.
Colonel SIBTHORP objected to the item included in this
vote for defraying the expenses of the Commission for Digesting
the Statutes of Criminal Law, an item and statutes which he
considered very hard indeed to be digested.—( Laughter.)
After a few words from Mr. Hindley, Sir C. Napier, and the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, the House divided, when there
appeared—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority for the vote
On our re-admission to the gallery, we found
Mr. CORRY on his legs, stating the improvements and
alterations which he proposed in the classification and pay of
captains in the navy. It was proposed to create a retired list of
300 captains of the age of sixty-five years and upwards, or
in case any of that age preferred remaining on the active
list, to select such under it, as from infirmity or otherwise,
were deemed worthy of being placed on this list. After this
list had been made up, he proposed that vacancies should not
be supplied until it had been reduced to 100, when it should
be made up in the same manner by those willing to accept
the retirement. By this arrangement the number of captains
would be reduced from 714 to 400, and the 14s. tid. list be re-
duced to 5a., while the others would be proportionably
decreased. The system had been introduced with
the best intentions and wishes of the Government, and he
believed it would be generally acceptable to the profession.
Capt. PECHELL said that with regard to the class of lieu-
tenants and commanders, to which his Hon. Friend bad alluded,
they were classes which did not rise by seniority, and he would
be ready to concur in any plan which would furnish them with
more active employment. It was necessary that those data
should be adopted for the regulation of the service. He had
on a great many occasions differed from his Honourable Friend
opposite, but then he thought that the objections which had
been urged might be removed.
Sir C. NAPIER said that he must support the claims of
those who had spent their lives in the service of their country.
It appeared to him that the clatwis of these retired officers were
well founded, and that the Government could not possibly re-
sist them. The allowance exceeded his (Sir C. Napier s)
most sanguine expectations.
Admiral DUNDAS said, that in his opinion, the benefits of
this vote should not be confined to captains merely. There
were many admirals on the one hand, and commanders on the
other, who were equally entitled to its advantages.
Sir G. COCKBURN defended the vote. Let the House
give it a fair trial, and if it did not meet with the sanction of
all classes in the navy, and was found to be inefficient in working,
then it would be still in the power of the Admiralty to alter
and amend it.
Sir R. PEEL said that there were cases in which an in-
crease of expenditure was the preferable economy, and he
thought that the retirement of 300 officers would be of this
character. Ho was quite aware that this was an important
vote, and that it would in some cases be liable to objection. In
some instances he should reserve the powerof appointing those
retiring captains to the rank of admirals, but this power would
only be exercised in the case of men distinguished by their abi-
lities and services, whose services it was desirable should not be
lost to the country.
Mr. S. HERBERT said that the effect of the measure, so
far from precluding, would double the chance of promotion
both to the admirals and captains.
The vote was then agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress and the House re-
sumed, and immediately after went into Committee of Ways
and Means, when several votes were agreed to, and the House
again resumed.
Mr. GREENE brought up the report of the Valuation (Ire-
land) Bill, which was, after a few words from Sir R. FIIRGU.
30s, received.
THE REAL PROPERTY (IRELAND) BILL.
The report on this Bill was received, and the Bill was ordered
to be read a third time this day.
THE ASSIGNMENT OF TERMS BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
NAVAL MEDICAL SUPPLEMENTAL BILL.
The House then went into Committee en the above Bill,
and the clauses having been passed, the report was ordered to
be brought up to-morrow.
WASTE LANDS ( AUSTRALIA) BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading of the Waste
Lands (Australia) Bill,
Mr. C. BULLER objected to any attempt to smuggle the
Bill through the House at that late haur. He could assure
the House and the Government that it would be tenaciously
and vigorously opposed in every stage, and that there were
many tnterests opposed to the passing of the measure.
After a few words from Mr. HAWES,
Mr. AGLIONBY moved that the Bathe raid th.t del six
months.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that if any opposition were
offered to the question that night he should be glad to postpone
it till to-morrow.
The gallery was, however, cleared, when the numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority —23
Mr. WARBURTON then moved the adjournment of the
debate till Monday week.
The gallery was again cleared for a division, but after some
time strangers were admitted, none taking place.
After a desultory discussion, in which Mr. Hawes, Mr.
Scott, and another Hon. Member took part, the gallery was a
second time cleared on Mr. Warburton's motion.
On our admission to the gallery, it appeared that no division
had taken place, but an arrangement had been entered into for
abandoning all the Bill except that part referring to Van
Dieman's Land, the discussion of which was adjourned till
this day.
The Apprehension of Offenders Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The Municipal Districts Bill was also read a third time and
passe 1.
The Leeds and Bradford Railway (Shipley to Colne) Mis-
take Rectifying Bill was read a second time and ordered to be
committed this day.
The Fees (Criminal Proceedings) Bill went through Com-
mittee.

63
-57