Star.
London, England, 1825-05-10 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

~:
}'
s

e
~.

,
1
I / •

Sit R. FERGUSON resented a Petition frees the Seamus of
the Port of London, respecting the Combination Lews.—Referred
to the Committee on the Combination Laws.

Sir bL RIDLEY presented • Pablo* Ana Newcastle-upon-
Tyne. in favour of the flUl foe Preventing Cruelty to Animals.
Mr. HOBHOUSE 'presented a Petition * die Operative
Sawyers of Westminster, praying to be mimidsai before the
Committee on the Combination Laws.

Mr. T. WILSON resented a Petition from the Woolstapiers ot
TAndon, praying to be beard before the Comndtter an the' Combi-
nation Laws.

Alderman THOMPSON presented a Petition from the Sawyers
on the Banks of the River Thames, (not Members of the Thames
Union,) praying for protection.—Referred to the Committee.
A Petition was presented from the Chamber of Commerce of
Belfast, against alter lug the regulations of the Butter Trade.
Mr. DUG DA LE presented a Petition from Aston, near Bir-
mingham, against further concessions to the Catholics.
Sir J. NEWPORT presented a Petition front Kilmoon,
planing of oppression by a Tithe Proctor.
Atter a few words from Mr. J. Spurn and Sir. Batmerr, the
Petitior. was read. Oa the question that it be printed,
Ur. BARING roar and said. he hoped that the Honourable
Secretary fur Ireland (Mr. Goulburn) would turn Ms attention to
this subject, and devise some remedy for these cases of hardship
and oppression under the Tithe system.
Mr. GOU LBURN said, the Government of Ireland had paid
the utmost attention to this subject ; and the law which recently
pass. d had given satisfaction to all parties' and was calculated tosio
away the matter of complaint represented in the Petition.
Sir A. HOPE prevented a Petition from Linlithgow, against,
any alteration in the Corn Laws.
Mr. MI.:REIM presented a Petition from Harwich, against
further concessions to the Catholics.

Mr. SCAR utrr presented a Petition from the Barristers and
Attornies of Neweastk upon-Tyne. in favour of the Catholics.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS supportvd the Petition.—Read. and laid
on the table. _ _ _

Sir T. I.IiTIIRRIDGE presented a Petition from a Parish in
Somersetskire, against farther concessions to the Catholics.
Ali.S RICE. with reteience to what had fallen from
the Hun. llarliet on a former night, as to the pubii.
ceinii of Dr. Tioy, said, that no sooner were the Ca-
tholic Hieraichy acquainted with the nature of the
mutes ptildished in the Roman Catholic Testament, than they di►
claimed them. and Ik. Troy himself had also disclaimed them.
S's LE 1 HIIIIIDGE said, he certainly thought,
wit n he quoted these notes, that they contained the
sentiments of the C itholic II rrarchy of Ireland; but
that was only one instance he adduced, to "hew that the sentiments
1,1 the Popish Cbtwch had nut changed, and sufficient remained to
si.pport his opinion.
General GASCOYNE said, these notes were actualf
published in the Dimity edition, though expunged in
that which circulated iu Ireland.
Mr. S. Hats and Sir 'l' law

mutually explained.
%Vat or the
more public
then read and

'aitarian
♦lw a aimi-

the Proteotant
the claims of

consideration a this Bill,
• agreed to.
been ntis•
on a lot mcr
Conimil tee in
, ITr had
ee, and wat
Hr thutiki vote

lusion to an

an Honour-
opule:lt Gen-
• Protestant

ot the Pro
any such ears..

hard to be

'attacked twice on the same niiht on the same subject.'
It was not Parliamentary. Every Representative had a right to
express his opinion without being called to account for it.
A Moans. under the Gallery said,that this was a Matter Waal
and nor of opinion.
Colonel FORAM, with .respect to sane assertion that
he had cbanged.bis mind on-the question, said, that he
wai induced toibink thin the two, collateral Bib would make the
gener.l nwainre of relief more aceeptable.
Lord GEORGE CAVENDISH mid Se hackthe au
therity of the Mr.4'ltre anshAFLord Stour.
ton to deny the fact. The Newspaper which had reported the
statement bad been prosecuted.
Sir J. NEW PORT said that the Honourable Baronet had eat
vindicated himself. lie had advanced what he was incapable of

saaintainittg.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGP. said he was capable of maintaining
whatever he had said, at the proper time and placs.—Thq, amend.
meets were then agreed to, the Hill ordered to be engrossed, and
ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. . .

_ ..... _
Mr. BROUGHAM said that the diseussinn would certainly
come oo•to.morrow. •
Mr. BROUGHAM said he saw the*Honourable
Member for Cork Castle in his place. He wished to
know whe•her the Honourable Member meant to move
any amendment as to the right of Catholics to sit in
Patitament, and whether he meant to take the sense of the
House on it?
Mr. BANKES sa:d he might possibly move two
amendments, the first, respecting Catholics sitting in
Parliament; aid -the second, to make the appointment
of Commissioners optional. But be should not take t►e sense of the
House on either Or them.

tam ELECTIVE ?RASMUS' BILL.
On the motion that the House resolve itself into a Committee
on this Bill,
Mr. GitarrAN said that he should enter his pro-
test against the lista:ore. Irish Members were divided
in °pinion concerning the Bill, and how could English
Members he capable of making up their minds upon it?
This Bill ought not to bemixed up with Catholic Eman-
cipation. He should oppose it on the same round that
he supported the great measure. The individual whose
name he bore would have opposed it. If the people of Ireland
were not worthy of the elective franchise, they were not worthy of
Emancipation.
Mr. V. FITZG ERA LD supported the motion that the Speaker
now, leave the Chair and made some remarks in favour of the
general principle of the Bill.
Mr.LITTLETON said, irwotild be inconvenient to
enter upon the general discussion at present. He would
merely say that it was his firm determination to resist
every attempt en extend the principle of disqualification
beyond the 40s. freeholders. His object was merely to
do away with fraudulent votes, and none other. He hoped the
House would let the Bill go into a Committee.
Mr. L. FOSTER said, that the princip'e of the Bill
was just what he had always supposed.. All he wished
was to annihilate fraudulent franchises. He was only
anxious to reform, and not to destroy. But the details
of the Bill were imperfect, and if it passed* a new kind
of fraud woad be generated. There was a class of
persons in Ireland who would be glad to increase their
influence—no matter by what means; and this measure
would 'afFOrd them the opportunity of doing it in a
fraudulent way. He wished to strike out of the Bill
those words which limited it to leasehold franchise.
The 40s. freeholders of Ireland were exactly the same
as 40s. freeholders in'England. It was just as preju-
dicial, in a constitutional point of view, to annihilate
the lash as to destroy the English freeholder. The
measure required great correction. He did not know
whether be should vote against it or not, but be hoped that it
would be considerably altered in the Comnittee.•
Sk I. NEWPORT hoped that the discussion might end, and
that the Bill might goluto the Columittee—(Hear).
Sir J. WROTTESLEY made some general aservadnis In
favour of the measure of Emancipation, and against the particular
Bill for disfranchising nearly 200,000.persosts.
Mr. DAWSON observed, toot the three measures—
the Catholic Relief Bull, the Regulation of the Elective
Franchise, and the Payment of the Catholic Priesthood,
were so blended together, that it was difficult to vote
for one without supporting the other. He did not dis-
approve of the present Bill, but he felt himself bound
to oppose it, because it was introduced into the House
to aid the Catholic Relief Bill, to which he was opposed
from principle. He believed that the freeholders of
Ireland were as much debased by this privilege as their
landlords were annoyed at being so often forced to use
their influence. He would gladly consent to raise the
qualification of voting to 201. which would introduce
into Ireland what was so much wanted—a class of yeo-
manry, which would stand between the higher and lower classes of
the people in support of liberty.
.-Lord EBRI NGTON said, that though he was a zeal.
ous friend to• Parliamentary Reform, yet he was willing
to support this Bill, because he understood k would be
conferring a boon on Ireland. and it would conciliate many to
the Catholic Relief Bill.
Lord CORRY was understood to be opposed to the
Bill, but if the Emancipation Bill were to be passed,
he thought the present Bill would diminish the difficulties of their
situation.
Mr. C. WILSON was more than half convinced that
the measure would conduce to the happiness and inde-
pendence of Ireland. He should, however. decide upon it by its
own merits, and not in connesion with any other question.
Mr. lIUME thought cite presen. measure the greatest
innovati •n he had ever known, on what he had been
accustomed to regard as sacred and inviolable. While
he objected to the measure in tot., he was a zealous
friend to Catholic emancipation ; but should the measure
have been introduced as a clause in the C ktbolie
he should hive voted against the Bill sooner than such
a measure should be carried. The Hon.-Member here
lead an extract from the letters of Dr. Doyle, to shew
that his opinion was decidedly adverse to any alteration
in the elective franchise. He should move for the ap.
pointment of a Committee to obtain information on the
subject. Years w. re allowed to elapse before Gram.
posind. with 50 or 60 voters, was disfranchised, and
then the franchise was communicated to thousands.
\Vas a whole people to be uisinUlthised without any
previous inquiry ? The abuse of the elective franchise
did not exist to the extent that was alleAed. He was
confident that the interests of half a million would be
affected by the proposed measure, and the popular
branch of tl4‘ electors would be annihilated. No modi-
fication in t e Committee would reconcile him to the
principle of the Bill. Let the two wings be t..ken off,
and the Bill for Emancipation would p •ss wi bout dif-
ficulty. It would be a better course to bring.hr a Bill
to l unish the land'ords who encouraged perjury and
falsehood. He wouli ask the friends of Parliamentary
Reform to reconcile their support of ti is measure with
the it former opinions on that subject. The cause of
Emancipation amid lose mote votes than it would gain
by auth a summers. - Nothing could justify such a measure hut a,
paramount advantage to the whole community. and that had not
been ,hewn.. The lion. Menhir then moved for the appointment
of a Select. Committee, to inquire into the abuse of the Elective
Franchise in Ireland, and how such abuse (if it existed), could be
effectually checked ?
Colonel JOHNSON utmost)/ supported the amendment.
Mt. it MARTIN wi.o d consider the measure as
most uncqns itutional, if separated from Catholic
Emancipation. Irish Gentlemen were the worst eci.
deuces upon such a measure. We ate al, said the
•

Iliartonnighteittrab em
h;tio-asanit'nointeprreOlplirlseedwirs; "rsi.crtir-JJlel°eeil
five franchise in England •as we'l as in Irelol? He
felt, notwithstanding, .cOmpelled to go into the Com-
!thittee, for Ito considered the Bit as a.aittifice for the
pUrchise of catholic Emancipation, at which eaerifice
he was willing to he the Priest-1A laugh). AmoNst
the• freeholders of Galway, he would -relate. an so-
'stance of independence, such asthe world cook, not
match. It was agreed between the candidate!, that
`their respective tenants should remain neuter, and that
if one should break loose, and give his vote for his
landlord, the latter should bring two other tenants to
•vote for his opp nest. In the course of the election, a
booth was about to close, as is usually the case when
'4O freeholders do not appear from a certain district
wi hin a given t;me. In order to prevent its closing,
five of his Honourable Colleague's freeholders, contrary
to his expressed desire, voted against him (Mr. Martin),
and kept the booth open. The other candidate imme-
diately offered reparation, and compelled ten of his
tenants to vote in his (Mr. M.'s) favour, but they did
so in another booth, which was also on the eve of
closing, in consequence of which occurrence, lee (Mr.
M.) lot 600 voters—(lnonense laaghtey). He however
acquitted his Honourable Friend (Mr. Daley) of any
participath.n in the occurrence.
Mr. DALEY rebutted such insinuations with indig%
nation. The facts were correct. but the most unfair
inuendoes were thrown out by his Honourable Col-
ic ague—(Cries of Ao. no. from all parts of Me 'louse).
He was"willing to go into the Committee, but he feared
he should be sinabte togive his support to the measure.
Mr. MARTIN explained. •
Mr. S. RICE conera•olated the House on what had
fallen from the two Members for Galway, which laid
open to them the real state of the 40 shilling Free-
holders in Iceland—(Hear, hear). The Honourable
Member for Aberdeen had stated that the persons to
whom the Catholics had entrusted their cause, had
betrayed them for personally ambitious views and in-
terested motives--(Hear, hear). He :evened that his
Honourable Friend (Mr. Hume) should have given the
weight of his assertion to the base insinuations of those
who, through disappointed vanity, sought to throw
odium upon honourable persons. He (Mr. H. 4 said,
that he could not support the Bill as a friend to Re-
form, but it was because he (Mr. S. R.) was a friend to
Reform, that he would support the Bill, and give his
vote upon the purest principles which ever actuated a
lover of popular rights.'
Mr. MACNAGHTEN rose to oppose the Bill alto.
gether. If the House wished to proceed judiciously in
such a course, it ought first to inquire what the abuses
of the existing system really were ? and then legislate to
remove them. Would it be fair, because the Borough
of Grampoond was corrupt, that they should disfnm-
ebbe the whole people of England? He considered the BEI
.int, that !nevoid sot vets for
F. BLARE supported the
Captain O'GRADY could not avoid saying that
the county which he represented was free froth the
excesses which bad been stated to prevail in other coun-
ties. The Honourable Member' adverted to a state-
ment made on a former night by the Honourable
Member for Armagh. He alluded to the circumstance
of a Gentleman gotog over to Ireland to serve the office
of Sheriff, It had been said the Gentlemen divided his
estate into 40s. freeholds for the purpose of returning
himself a Member to serve in Parliament. He was en-
abted to say, from the best authority, that the Gentle-
man alluded to denied the statement. The Gentleman
did not divide his estate, nor add one more voter to his
tenantry.—With respect to the Bill he should not vote
for it, but support the Catholic Relief Bill, believing it would do
much good for Ireland.
Illr. D. BROWNE supported the measure, because be thought
the present system of voting for 40s. freeholds, perpetuated the
misery and degradation of the people of Ireland.
-Colonel TRENCH gave his opinion, that this Bill would bean
honest meuure and a blessing to Ireland. He should support it
upon its own merits.
Lord MILTON said he should support the Bill be-
cause it would promote the object of the great measure.
He thought the benefits supposed to be derived from
this measure were much exaggerated. Out of this mea-
sure great evils might arise. Those who divided their
estates into Forty Shilling Freeholds, would divide them
into £lO freeholds. He was not disposed to doubt the
independency of the freeholders of Ireland, but be should
rote for the Bill, because it would check the Oligarchy.
An Honourable Member who represented a borough in
England, and who so strongly opposed the Bill, some
years ago represented the county of Antrim, in Ireland.
When the heir of a Noble Family came of age he came
in for Antrim, and the Honourable Member represented
the Borough of & ford. That was certainly no proof
of the independence of the freeholders. He should
give the measure his support, but it did not go the length
of preventing fictitious votes. The gr?at object was to
put an end to fictitious voting. The Noble Lord sug-
gested whether that might not be accomplished by
staking the term longer for registering votes? A man should scat
vote until a number of years had expired, and his land was map
valuable. In the Constance it was probable be might submit a
proposition on the subject.
Mr. id ACNA.GHTEN explained. The Noble Lord
had spoken of him as the Representative of a Borough,
u if be had storied to vote---t Here a loud and general exclamation
was raised of Spoke ! spoke! Order ! Chair !)
The SPRAKRR said, an Hon. Member who had spoken in de-
bate was only allowed to explain.
Mr. MACN AO HUM again, in explanation, said the Noble
Lord was wrong in his stikensent.
Mr. W. BECHER was sorry more information had
not been procured, but no man who was impressed
with the importance of the great question, could refuse
to vote for the Bill then befOre the House. It was
called for by the note:toot landlords, a-d the Roman
Catholics gave their consent to ft. He should vote for
it, because it would facilitate the Catholic Relief Bill,
and 'thereby promote 0 e inures: of Ireland. The ques-
tion being loudly called for, the House divided.
For going into the Committee . • 168
Against it
•
—ll5

Majority

When the Gallery was re-opened, Mr. Homiousx was entreating
those Hon. Members who had expressed their intention not to sup•
punt the Suffrage Hill, to give their vote for the Catholic Relief BTU.
Mr. HUME sai.-, he iotmetly declared, whets the
two qutstions were coupled together, that he would
give up the Catholic Question, rather than disfranclii-e
cite Irish Ftee'•oldets. In that view ht had wished the
Bill then before the House to be separated from the Roman Catho-
lic Relief -NIL He Could not vote for both.
Alf. W. SAllTli had voted on various occasions fur the Catholic
Question, and also for Parliamentary Reform. lie saw tmtiting
inconsistent in following that course of duty.
Mr. BROUUHANI hoped that what he should say
would meet with the mote favourable reception of his
Honourable Friend, as he quite agreed with him in
bating iswainst the Bill. He (Mr. Brougham) lamented
not Kt: than his Honourable Friend that this measure
had beer. connected, he thought most unadvisedly, with
tl.e. Catholic Relief Bill. It v►as only owing to an

. .
halireinatfon of the mind that in"fi-x; n rents 1.41
formed between the two Measures, Thee was ao nr4
cessary or natural twice' or siMil 4ri,y between them.
He had supported this opinion by his vote on a former
night. He might even take to himself the credit of
leading the °I-position to the inea,stite, but his Name
then %horrid not be with him a grnend of opposition to
the Bill for. Emancipation, which was totally distinct
from the freehold question and the question of Pariii-
mentary Reform, but which he supported because f
considered the passing of it essential to the salvation of
the Empire—(fienr).—lle would beseech his H nom.-
able Friends. the Members for Dm ham and B•Plton"
(Mr. Lamhton and Colonel Johnson) both by the iriend-
shipthat subsisted between, and by the more important
consideration of the duty they (Avid their country, not
to oppose the Emancipation Bill, more particularly as
they could offer no better reason for such an oppositiorti
than that they had failtd in carrying another measure, of a totally'
different nature and degcription. • • . •
Mr. LAMB TON said, that perhaps hehad. no ttAlle
to complain of hiving fallen under the lash' of' his
friends, as it was no uncommon lot in the history of
political events. One :Honourable Gentleman hail in-
tacked his motive—that was riot fair, and especially as
he was willing to state the grounds upon which he ac ed
himself. The reason why he shotild not vote for the
Catholic Question was because it was connected wiiir a
Bill of dislranchisemenr—(flear). As he would' prefer
the continuance of the 40,. freeholders even toll* grant
of the Catholic Claims, his vote should be directed
cordingly. Nothing had fallen from either of the Ron.
Gentlemen, that could induce him ti alter his opinion
in this respect. The present 13.9 was as true') a part
of the Bill for relieving the Cathati..s, as if it.was
clause in th it Bill, instead of being a distinct and se- .
parate enactment. Such was the conduct he should
purine, such were the motives that induced him to
adapt it. Ile was not to he hrowh.aten out of his
memo, but would hereafter; as he had hitherto, act f9r the good of
his country, and to she best of his judgment, so help him (ion.
Mr. BROU,,HANI wished to put it to any Hon.
Member (it was a large challenge, as he believed there
were nearly MO present), whether he would get up and
say, these had beet! anything in the tone of what he
(Mr. B.) had ventured to submit which could be consi.:
dered as an attempt to browbeat ?—(Hens) If even the
lion. Member for Durham himself would say there WAS
anything beyond affectionate and respectful remonstrance, then he
(Mr. B.) would admit be had been guilty of a great offence.
Colonel JOHNSON repeated that he did not think
Catholic Emancipation was worth the price of this Bill.
Mr. JAMES said, horn the evidence before the
Irish Committee, which he had taken the trouble of
reading, he was persuaded that the Irish forty shilling freeholders
were freemen In name and not in reality.
The House then went into a Committee on the Rill.
Mx. LITTLETON said be merely wished the Bin se be com—
mitted preform now, in order that it might be printed, and Mem—
bers might have an opportunity of reading it. He therefore moved.
that the Bill should be recommitted on Thursday neat.
11r. V. FITZGBR LH niketed to this, but after some words
from Mr. HISSZIPOSI, SO J. Nswroae, Mr. CALCILA rr, and
osentafentltticytHrao,usesonthAseedriz
:do not n
re
—Adjourned
ytuatet
ztosboejbledcaPyLe:crdsdisedlapyot.:edhith: Hun. Member con --
Punt star, explaining that this was merely Iwoforwes, and that mint-
t
illofetruhei'notherg. 'Orders on'

THE DUKE OF Yoult"S SPzECIL

...m0Mp....,.

The Speech delivered, by his Royal Highness the
Doke of Youlc, in the debate of the V.Ath tilt. having
been very differently reported in differen: Newspaper-,
and much discussion having arisen on the exprev,io a
attributed to his Royal Highness, we insert the' follow-
ing accurate statement of the Speech, as it was actually
delivered

His Royal Highness stated, that he had been requested to pre-
sent to their Lordships the Petition of the Dean and Canons of
Windsot, praying that no further concessions stiould be made to
the Roman Catholics.

He considered it unnecessary, in bringing before their Lordships
the Petition of so learned and respectable a body,to assure them that
it was worded so as to ensure its reception ; but before he moved that
it should be read, he must be permitted to my a few words.
Sensible as his Royal Highness was of his want of habit and abi-
lity to take a part in their Lordships' Debates, it was not without
the greatest reluctance that he ventured to trespass upon their time
and attention ; but he felt that there were occa.ions when every
man owed It to his country and to his station, to declare his senti-
ments; and no opportunity could, In his opinion, offer, which
required mere imperiously the frank avowal of them than the pre-
sent, when their Lordships were called upon to make a total
change in the fisidamental principle of the Constitution, and. in his
Royal Highness's view of the question, to strike at the very root
of its existence.

His Royal Highness observed, that 28 years had elapsed since
'this question had been first agitated, under the-most awful circum-
stances, while this country was eugand in a most arduous and
expensive, though just aod glorious war; that the agitation of it
had been the cause of a most serious and alarming' illness to ars
Illustrious Personage now no more, whose exalted character and
virtues, and whose parental affection for his people, would render
his memory ever dear to this country ; that it had also produced
the temporary retirement from his late Majesty's COoncils of one of
the most able, enlightened, and most honest Statesmen of whom
this country could boast.
Upon this question they were now called to decide ; and from
the first moment of its agitation to the present, his Royal Highness
bad not foe one instant hesitavd, or felt a doubt as to the propriety
of the line of conduct he bad adopted in reference to it.
That he mast also call their Lordship" attention to the great
change of language and sentiments which had taken place, since the
subject was first introduced, among the advocates for Catholic
Emancipation.
That at first the most zealous of these had cautiously and yet
strenuously endeavoured to impress upon the minds of the people
that Catliclic Emancipation ought not to be granted wkhnut esta-
blishing strong and effectual barriers against any encroachment no
the Protestant ascendancy. But how changed was now their lan-
guage! Their Lordships were now required to surrender every
principle of the Constitution, and to deliver us up, bound hand and
foot, to the mercy and generosity of the Roman Catholics, without
any assurance even that they would be satisfied with such fearful
concessions.
His Royal flightless bad, upon a former occasion, taken the
liberty of stating his sentiments folly upon the subject, and had en..
deavuvred to convey to their Lordships that no person was ntore
decidedly inclined to toleration than his late Majesty, but that It
must be admitted there is a great difference between toleration,
participation, and emancipation. Ile would not now enter into this
discussion, convinced as' he was that if the Hill should again be
brought under their consideration, its merits would be much more
ably discussed by others of their Lordships. There were, however,
one or two points which appeared to him to have been kept out of
view in the different debates that had occurred iu various places,
and which seemed to him of such vital importance that be could
not help touchirg upon them.
The first was, the situation in which the Church of England
would be pbced,should Catholic Emancipation pans. Mi. Royal

,

1114.1. •• OM.. ,i. \MUMMY MS .alias....
Mr. S. Batt and Sir 'l' lei mamma mutually explain
11r. V. FITZGERALD said, the withdraw,
Cath. lk Bishop,' App.i.b4tiou was made num
I than their approval had been.—The Petition was titer
laid on the table.
,; ,
blr. W. SMITH presented a Petition from the Unit
t.' 1* . ,:enters of Itrigloon, in favour of the Catholic Mims. A
lar Petition from South-place, tin bury-square.
k A Petition was presented fr.= the Colliers of U
.: / . against re-enacting the Combination Laws.
N. Air. IIIiOUGH ANI presented a Petition from the
Dissenters of S..fron Walden, in Essex, in favour of the
•) the Roman Catholics./
' The Thrown S.lk BiU went through a Comm
port to-morrow.
CATHOLIC RELIES BILL.
f Mr. BROM II A M moved the furtiori consideration
c;i and that tbs. Amendments of die Committee be agreed i
t. ' • 1 Mr. J W. MAXWELL mod, that he bad t
J Vprezented as to what had fallen from hint on
cr.;ca sion. Be had merely voted for a Cum
,
c ider to acquire information on the subject.
, - • re .d the evidence t4lten before the C. intuitive,
/ not induced by it to change his former sentiments. He.
. against the third reading.
Lord G. CAVENDISII made some anus;
•
ass rtion which fell the other evening brim an
able Baronet (Sir T. Lethbridge) that an opul
dental% n ar Wetherby had aswited that the ii
i 1 - i Churches were profaned by the performance of
tenant service. That Gentleman bad never made any 1
tion, and the Hon. Baronet was bound toexplain.
Sir T. LEI fiaBItIDUE said that • es aas ha
. . .
. .
1 . .
'y • ,

Highnett *ere mistiken lie would doubtless be set tight; but he
liztl always understood that the Established Church of England
sands in a very different situation from any other religious persua-
sion in the amids dials...at even frntit that o the Sectarians In this
country. The Established Church was subject to its own govern,
anent, and did out admit rise iuterferewee of the Civil Authorities
It was placed under the authority of the King as the Head of it,.
and under the controul of Parliament, so much so, that the Church
was not only not represented as a body in the Lower House of Par-
liament, hat that no Clergyman was admitted to a seat in it.
Surely, their Lordships could not wish to place the Established
Church of England upon a worse footing than any other Church
within these realms ; nor allow the Roman Catholics, who not only
refuse to submit to our rules, but who deny any authority oT the
Civil Power over their Church, to legislate for the Established
411sureb, which must be the ease if they should be admitted to seats
in either House of Parliament.
The other point to which his Royal Highness had to advert was
one be felt to be of a more delicate nature. He must, therefore,
begin by swift to their Lordships, that be spoke only his own in-
dividual sentiments, as he must not be supposed to utter in that
House the sentiments of any other person. He was vansible that,
by'what he was about to say, he should subject himself to the scoffs
and jeers of some, and to the animadversions of others; but from
speaking conscientiously his own feelings and sentiments, be would
by no apprehension whatever be appalled or deterred.
That be wished to ask whether their Lordships had considered
the situation in which they might place the Kum, or whether they
recollected the oath which his Maaairr had taken at the Altar,
to his People, upon his Coronation ? lie begged to read the words
of that oath:
" I will, to the utmost of my power, maintain the laws of Gots,
the true profession of the Gospel, and the Protestant reformed
Religion established by law—and I will preserve unto the Bishops
and Clergy of this realm, and to the Churches committed to their
charge, all such rights and privileges as by law do or shall appertain
to them, or any of them."
Their Lordships must remember that ours is a Protestant Rua,
who knows no mental reanestion, and whose situation is different
from that of any other person in this country. That his Royal
Highness and every other individual in this country could be re-
leased from his oath by the authority of Parliament; but the Kum
could not. The 'sib, as be had always understood, is a solemn
obligation entered into by the person who took it, front which no
act of his own could release him ; but the Koss was the third part
of the State, without whose voles:Use, consent no Act of the Le.
gislature could be valid, and be could not relieve himself from the
obligation of an oath.
His Royal Highness feared that he bad already trespassed too
long upon their Lordships, and be thanked them for the patience
wllh which they had heard him. If be had expressed himself too
warmly, especially in the Liner part of what be had said, he must
appeal to their liberality. That he felt the subject most forcibly,
and that it affected him yet moreZeeply when he remembered that
to its agitation must be ascribed that severe illness, and ten years
of misery, which had clouded the existence of his illustrious and
beloved father. That he should therefore conclude with assuring
their Lordships that be had uttered his honest and conscientious
sentiments, founded upon principles which be had imbibed from his
earliest youth; to the justice of which be had subscribed, after se.
rioosconsideration, when he attained more mature years; and that
these were the principles to which• be would adhere, and which be
would maintain and act up to to the latest moment of his existence,
whitemr might be his situation of life—So help him Goo !

THE N_IXENINti STAR

LONDON.

TUESDAY, MAY 10, 1825.
STOCK EXCHANGE, TWELVE O'CLOCK.

Consols opened this morning at 914 to for the Account, with
scarcely anything doing.
In the Foreign Market the South American Securities are rather
better, but there is very little doing.
Current Priers; New la/ I, Old Spanish 241, Rus-
sian 951 /. Mexican Colombian New MIL Chalon 841, Aus-
trian 961 97. Beni) Scrip 14 1 discount, Mexican Scrip 11
Iliac. Greek Scrip S disc. Danish Scrip 2 2 disc.

et:ICE OP STOCKS AT ONE O'CLOCK.
Bank Stock 230% 1,4 230
3 per Cent. ked. 901% Vs
S per Cent. Cons. 91% 911/s
3i per Cent. 98
Si per Cent. Red. 977 a %
4 per Cent. New 10514 105 A,
Long Ann. 21 15-16 22
India Stock 2791/4
India Bonds 70
4.:1.000 Excheq. Bills 53 59
4:500 ditto 53 55
£lOO and £2OO ditto 53 5.
India for Acct. 280
Cons. for Acct. 911/2 1(4 9114
FOREIGN EXCHANGE.
AMIITIRDAW, MAT 6.—On London, 29.6. 2 111. 39. 4.
FOREIGN FUNDS, TWO O'CLOCK.
Austrian Bds 5 p Ct. 96j Mex. Bonds, 5 p Ct. 77
Brazilian Bonds 841 Ditto Am. 771
Ditto Scrip, 5 per Cent. Data Scrip L 825, te
Ditto Scrip 1823, 1e pr Ditto Acct. 11 I
Buenos Ayres Bonds, Neapolitan Beads, 1824,
Ditto Ace. Peruv.Bosulz, 6 per Ct.
Milian Bonds, 6 p Ct. Portuguese Bonds 91
Colombian lionds,O p C. Prussian Bonds, S p Ct. 100 i 1
Ditto Bonds, 1824, 861 9 Ditto* 1822, 101;
Ditto Ace. 89* Rug, 80nd5,1822, p Ct.
Dania' Bonds, S per Ct. 101; Ditto for Ace. 95‘
Ditto Scrip, 1825, Spanish sp. Ct. C. 24; 4
Ditto Acct. 2; dis Ditto Acct. 24; 4
Greek Bonds 51i Span. sp. et C. 1825,
Ditto Acct. Ditto Bonds, 1820,
Ditto Snip, 1825, French Rentes, S per Ct. 10111.
Ditto Acct. S dis Exchange 951. loc.
BRITISH AND FOREIGN SHARES, TWO O'CLOCK.

MINIS

SNARL PAID. PRICK rift SRAM
Anglo Nfeziean - £lOO 8220 iss. 25 pen. £35
Anglo Peruv.hliningAss. 100 5 4%
Brazilian - - 100 - 5 - - 15%
Cornwall and Devonshire .50 .5 5g
General Mining Asso. 100 - 5.. • 15% 14% 14
l'asco Peruvian - 100 • 5 - -17 % 161
Pataat La Paz, & Peru,. 50 6 9% 10 9%
‘I del hoe & Coal 45 - 10 - 11

ASSURANCE COMPANY.
100 5
MISCESLANZOIIS.