Star.
London, England, 1822-06-08 00:00:00

-
0

• C

•
• 41

- -....-

CITY off+ DON TAVERN,
Jona 7, i.e,.
AT a MEETING of tW COMMITTEE for the
GENERAL susscairmw for sone lINDIEDL
ATE ASSISTANCE in the • =TERME TEMPORARY
DISTRESS-of the South WeetWfrProvioces of IRELAND; +
The amount of 210 Itemiteinets in Mosey to Ireland, from,
the Bth of way to the 7th of Jane Inclusive, is £3114575, treas.-
meted to Central or Local Commitlees, or Other Millet Pro.
per Pawns.
Amount of Funds placed and to be placed with the several
Protestant and Catholic Mishaps of the Dioceses in ethidt the
Extreme Distress prevails, £4lOO.
The Committee have wide purchases In Scotland, the River
Thames, and Western Ports of Ragland, of more than Two
Thousand Tons of good Potatoes, intended for Seed; and have
dispatched and are dispatching them to the several Ports and
Harbours of Ireland, from Sligo all mead to shaven.
With equal pain and regret, the Committee feel obliged to
certify to the general community of Greet Britain, that they
have found the poverty and distress of Ireland, and the great
deficiency of the accustomed food 0 Potatoes of the Southern
and Westtrn Provinces, to be very extended and general, and'
the suffering of the people still fearfully increasing. They
anxiously hope that the assistance afforded by the Government,
by the Proprietors, or Residents in those Districts, who have
property or meow and by the humane and liberal sympathy
of England, has tended, in some degree, to mitigate this great
distress and most severe want; but they feel themselves, by
their position, obliged publicly to declare, that the evidence
they have of its existence, through nearly one-third of Ireland,
containing a population of nearly two millions. a large propor-
tion of which is inihe most destitute condition, is suck as to
render it indispensable for them to continue to call on_the gene-
rous sympathy of Englishmen of all ranks and classes, to contri-
bute to the mitigation of the extreme distress and misery in
Ireland, to which the most general and liberal beneficence can-
not be wholly efficient, from this time to the middle of August
next, however nobly and usefully it be suited to assist in the
general efforts for relief.
The deficiency of the crop of potatoes of the last season.
throughout the Southern and Western Provinces of Ireland, and
the discovery made, too late, by the peasantry,. that of that part
of their crop saved and stored, a large proportion had perished
in the pits, through the unsoundness of the growth, have together
been a principal cause of the present sudden and lamentable
scarcity of the accustomed food of the poorer classes of a nu-
merous population.
The Committee have every reason to rely on the spontaneous
liberality and sympathy of the inhabitants of Great Britain, to
afford their generous aid, in the present calamity of the hour,
in a manner to avert the danger of more extended suffring and
want. JOHN SMITH, Chairman.
Amount of Subscriptions already advertised £72,475 12s. Id.
Subscriptions received I From llammersley and Co.
from the University, Oxford—per Fletcher,
County, and Town of Parsons, and Co. £212 9
Carnbridge,and trans- Jas. Thompson, Esq. 2 2
mimed by :he Cam- From Ihummond and Co.
bridge Committee: W. K.'s second Mitt 1 1
Front the University, Lord Brudenell 20 0
by the Vote of the From Bouverie and Antrobus.
Senate 200 0 Mr. John Martyr 2 2
From Individual Sub- From Snow and Paul.
scribers in the Uni- I Jere. Dyson. Esq. 20 0
verity, Couuty, and From Child and Co.
Town 915 18 Y. Z. 3 5
SzausteadAbbotts, addi- Mrs. Sheppard, Am.
Urinal sub. per lies% port 50 0
Thomas Field 3 2 . From Praed and Co.
S.:cond Dragoons—The Northampton, first pay-
Officers, Non-Coln- ment 100 0
missioned Officers, From Barclay and Co.
Trumpeters, and Pri- William Walcot, Esq.
vales 371.- 176.4 d. Oundk 5 0
Eghtuu, per the Rev. T. From Glyn am! Co.
Jeans, D.D. 361.111.81 11. Monteith, lia' q.
Howard,Jewel,and Gib. DI. P. 50 0
sun. Stratford, per W. From Martin, Stone, and Co.
Holt and Co. 50 0 Miss Amelia Harding 2 2
Brownlow-street, 110 - From Bosanquet and Co.
born, Inhabitants, in George Pring, Esq. 3 3
sums not exceeding Front Smith, Payne, and Co.
ss. each. per C. T. B. 10 0
Scott, Esq. 33 I Exmouth, per Curries
Mr. G. Belzoni.—The and Co. 971. 18s. 9d.
amount paid fur the Front Jones, Loyd, and Co.
Ticket of Admission Leek Church (Staf.
improperly stopped ford) 571. es. ad.
at the door of the From Pule and Co.
Opera House, on the W. Morgan, Esq.
30th of Nay, and Graigworth House 2 2
returned to hint by Rev. C. A. Williams 1 1
the party front whom The Misses Williams,
the same was pur- Sangilby Castle 1 1
chased 10 10 From Dorrien and Co.
Rocbester.-The Corpo- The Hon. and Rev. 1).
portion and Inhabit. Rice, Oddington 5 0
ants, perE.Manehrk. Front Vetting and Co.
Esq. Mayor 1654 its. Cod. S. F. 5 0
Great Burstead, in. D. M. 2 2
eluding £l. cis. 6d. Lloyd's.
from three Benefit R. 5 5
Clubs 20 0 G. A. Davis, Esq. 10 10
Small Subscriptions 510 Front Stephenson, Remington,
From Chambers and Son. and Co.
C. S. second sub. 2 0 Salisbury, midi)? Sub.
J. Calcraft, Esq. M.P. 10 0 scriptioos 31.75. ld.
The Committee will meet at the City of London Tavern daily,
4st Eleven for Twelve.
Subscriptions are received at the Committee Room, between
the Hours of Twelve and Four; by Smith, Payne, and Smiths;
and by all the Bankers in London and Westminster, no other
persons being authorised by the Committee to receive them.
By Order of the Committee,
M ICH. W. TROY, Hon. Sec.

• • •
thee, he should feel deeply midis& It ea 1611 182 calf a least
of duty, but indithidin wideliwasiniike OM& k ibteeinari a•
oilcloth a NUL
111.1. ND. tel net sise to defeat is the Petides,
which be regarded as ene width It was way Mr, for disk
Lordships to receive. Still less did be =as to wedges, the
diseossioo on the assodire=which the Pieties the di-
rected; for, though disk s
s should not have the bees&
of the Noble Duke's esethienee, he was conthwed diet, ,eiliedior
that NoW Doke sheillibepossent at de thee, sheuldseen
himself ends ParlitheentOry tn kb 'efts W "We
ea the sobjeet we be Dal ka nbiththi
the mender in which die Dais daseelbed die 111111, as
one for greeting peculiar fainters to Catholic Petro is Aides
of the Ceistiteden. Let the Noble Lord seed the 818 led he
would esseed it was not one to grant Loans in elided= et the
Coestismis, but one to restore the seeks' Cossetted= of the
unwary end of that House. In saying diet he meant to express
: eerie es to the propriety of pasties the re; bet he
sit miler so etroneons a to be seethe* to the
world by en individual of rand:lc:or irancetts whom opinion
must certainly be looked to by the uninformed on the subject.
olke Bill on the table must rest on its own merits. Some doubted
whether the period were come for passing such a mason, others
objected to the measure altogether, but nothing but the grossest
ignorance could maintain that if the Bin did pass, it would not
render the Constitution more analogous to what it was In lamer
times. He also assured the Noble Duke that he knew some-
thing of the public opinion in that part of the country from
which the Petition had come, and that it was by no means so
general against the Bill as the Noble Duke supposed. And, if
Mach exasperation had prevailed on the subject, it would have
still more become the Noble Duke to be correct in what he
stated, and not to give a description which was totally inapplica-
ble to the measure.—The Petition having then been received,
' and bid on the table,
The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented similar Petitions
from the Borough of Newark-upon-Trsmt, the Towns of East
Redford and Tuckford, the Parish of Sutton and Ashley, and
from the Inhabitants of Nottingham. The last had been signed
in two days by 1825 individuals.—Read and laid on the table.
COMPLAINT AGAINST THE BISHOP or PETERBOROUGH.
' Lord DACRE said, he held in his hand a Petition which he
dieuld present to the House with great reluctance, because it
bare witlesome severity against a high character in that House,
who hid been distinguished for his piety and learning. It was
1 the Petition of the ltev. Thomas Saddleworth Grimshaw, who
complained of the oppressive and illegal conduct of a Right Rev.
Prelate, who would not allow the Petitioner to officiate in his
diocese, because heliad not satisfactorily answered a number of
questions on theological points. The Rev. Prelate had first put
87 questions; and afterwards added 36 more to them. The
Noble Lord contended that a Prelate had no right to examine
Clergymen in the manner he had thought ht to do; there was
no law that could authorise him to do so • fOr if a Clergyman
could ekplain his faith In Latin within the doctrines of the 59
Articles, he was then by law sufficiently qualified to perform his
duties as a Minister of. the Church of England; for by these
Articles, Bishop Burnet said, the doctrines of the Church were
comprised within a proper compass, freed from the niceties of
sehoolmen, and went to establish the peace of the Church.—
Several modern authorities had since confirmed these as the real
doctrines of the Church. It was necessary in this question to
consider the declaration of his Majesty, respecting the meaning
of the Articles. which would serve as a confirmation of what he
had stated. He contended that the Rev. Prelate was bound to
examine according to the 39 Articles only; and that he had no'
sight to put a great number of questions out of those Articlek,
and which a person might be unable to answer. On a former
occasion the Rev. Prelate had said that House was not a place
for theological discussions; but he contended that this was not a
theological question, but a question of personal right. Suppose
every Clergyman, on his removal from one parish to another,
was to be subject to such examinations as those, and deprived of,
his rights if he did not comply with the terms imposed on him,
would that House have no right to interfere? and if such a prat.
lice were to prevail, would it not go to overturn the Church?—
The Crown had a power of settling matters of this kind by call-
ing Convocations; and it was the duty of that House so address
the Crown to correct the practice in question. Therefore he
should, after this Petition was laid on the table, move an Ad-
dress to the Crown for the purpose. In anything that fell from
him now, be meant no personal disrespect whatever towards the
Rev. Prelate, for whom he entertained the highest respect. He
should now move that the Petition do lie on the table.
The Bishop of PE'f ERBOROUG II rose to reply to the,
Noble Lord. The Petitioner had suppressed the chief part of
this case. Every examinant had a right to use his own mode of
examination. When he put the questions alluded to, his only
object was to ascertain afterwards whether the answers to them
corresponded with the principles contained in the Liturgy of the
Church. It was a most delicate thing for temporal authorities
to interfere with ecclesiastical authorities, as to their modes of
examination ; and if such a thing was done, every Curate in the
kingdom might send a Petition to their Lordships' complaining
of the modes of examination; for every Bishop had his mode of
examining. And these questions were not tests which Clergy-
men were bound to abide by, but were put as the means of
ascertaining whether the opinions of Clergymen were conform-
able to the doctrines of the Church. This was precisely what he
had done with regard to the present Petitioner. When the
questions were sent to him, he sent a statement which filled ten
folio pages, so full of equivocation as to be rather an insult to
the Diocesan than an answer to the questions—they were mere
evasions, which explained nothing. Therefore he could not judge
of the sound doctrine of a man who would not let him know
what his doctrines were. There were numerous opinions at pre-
sent going forth as to what Orthodoxy was, and it was necessary
to asvatain what the real opinion of every Clergyman was; and
it was the duty of the Bishop to judge for himself of every man's
orthodox faith, which could only be done by examination. Uhe
put questions, he had a right to expect intelligible answers. He
never exercised in his examinations the severity imputed to him;
nor did he reject men for not being able to answer his questions,
nor in any case except where men seemed to hold doctrines con-
trary to the tenets of the Church. It was notorious that these
questions had been repeatedly put iii his, and in other Dioceses.
lie had not added 36 to 87 questions; he only substituted them
for the 87. As to the 39 Articles, they were not the only
standard by which the doctrines of the Church were to be
maintained ; fur thtre were ether doctrines which must be
adopted as a standard of faith. Ile warned them not to in-
terfere rashly with the Authorities of the Church, as the re.
Haien of the country might be endangered if they listened to
such Petitions as those. The only point at issue was, whether
Bishops had or had not a right to examine in the Artieles ?
His txamination was not a test, but merely an examination in
the Articles, which it was his duty to do. It was not sufficient
to make candidates look closely over the New Testament, but
to find out what were the particular pointi of the Clergyman's
faith ; and that could not be ascertained by a Clergyman merely
subscribing to the 39 Articles; for, it was absolutely necessary
that he should be examined in them. He never rejected any
matt for a difference of mere points of doubtful explanation, but
when men signified opinions directly hostile to the doctrines of
the Church. In answer to the complaint of oppression preferred
against him, he had now to state, that, during five years he had
only rejected three individual" fur their improper doctrines. It
was necessary to make a stand against those doctrines which
prevailed in the reign of Charles the First ; for if they were to
prevail now, the Bishops of the present day would experience
the same fate they had experienced at that time. The Royal
Declaration which the Petition now prayed to have enforced,
was issued not against Bishops, but against Puritans ; and that
Declaration, if now enforced, would militate against the Peti-
tioner. lie exercised his power of putting questions by virtue
of the existing laws, and no Royal Declaration could abrogate
those laws. Therefore he trusted their Lordships would not
interfere in a manner subversive of those laws. The Petition
was founded in sophistry and falsehood, and he was sure their
Lordships would not listen to the prayer of it. He had no per-
sonal interest in this question : he had no object but that of
preserving the Church of the country against mischievous doc-
trines, 'which went to degrade the Episcopal authority of the
country—(Hear, bear).
Lord HOLLAND declared that he never witnessed a more
complete ignomutio elenehi than that which prevailed through
the whole of the Reverend Prelate's speech, and maintained
that he had exercised an unconstitutional abuse of his power, in
adopting the course of examination he did. It was a mi-
serable equivocation to say the Act was no more than question
and answer; and still more unjustifiable to say he was autho-
rised by Canons to put such questions,, for the Canons were not
the law of the land, and the Learned and Reverend Prelate bad
no right to assume the latitude of discretion which he contended
for. The success of every clergyman in the Reverend Lord's
Diocese, must depend on the answers given to his questions;
and it was absurd to say the questions and answers were mere
matters of course. The policy BOW pursued was to narrow the