Star.
London, England, 1825-05-14 00:00:00

r

. -
*

PA RLIAMEN 'ARV PROCEEDINGS.

HOUSE OF LORDS, MAY us.

CATIOLIC CLAIN'S.
The Archbishop of YORK presented a Petition from the Clergy
of the West Riding of the County of York, against further cances.
*ions to the Catholics.
Lord KING admitted thit the Peti:ion was respect-
ably signed and had been adopted at a public Meeting,
where the subj.-ct had been fairly discussed, and the.
oppo,itiouists, though not very numerous, had distin-
guished them elves by the good sense of their speeches.
It was a remarkable thing that in such huge Dioceses as
York,Cant erbary,Winch ester, and Durham, there were but few Peti-
Mons against the. Catholics; they only abounded in the small Dm-
ccses, such as Leicester, Devon, Cornwall, and Sussex, which were
possessed by Bishops in tromatu. . lie preferred those venerable
fissures of the House, to those pieces of furniture which were con-
stantly changing their places.
Lord KEN YON conl3 not hesit ate one moment to
say, that what had falltn from the Noble Lord, respecting certain
Right Rev. Prelates, was nothing less than downright calumny.
Lord KING replie.i, that it the Noble Lord meant to
say that what he had advanced respecting the nut-ober
of. Pet dons coming from small Dioceses was not the
fact, he positively gave him the -denial. As to the in-
ference tar be'drawn from that fact, the Noble Lord might say that
it was or was not a calumny, he (Lord King) perfectly despised it.
Let the question be tried by the number of Petitions presented to
their Lordships.
Lord KENYON.did tr:t.deny the fact mentioned by
the Noble Lord, but repeated that the motives which he attributed
to the Bishops were a downright calumny.
The Bishop of EXETER said that his Diocese was
one of the hugest, and at the same time one of those
which had sent most Petitions against the Catholic
Claims. Ile declared, however, that he had never used
any influence to procure Petitions. They bad come
voluntarily from the Clergy and the people, in conse-
quence chiefly of what the Noble Lord had said in she House, and
lest they should be thought favourable to the measure in progress.
He denied for himself and his brethren, the charge of the Noble
Lord, and he believed that a great majority of the country was hos-
tile to the concession of the Catholic Claims.
Lord KING meant to apply his observation to the
Revenues and not to the extent of Dioceses. It was
front those with small revenues that most Petitions were sent. This
almost reconciled him to one of the practices of the Roman Church,
which allowed of no translation.
The LORD CHANCELLOR could take upon him-
self to say that their Lordships owed the great number
of-Petitions before diem to the speeches of the Noble
Lord in the House; for the people and the Clergy did not like to
be held out as indifferent to the Protestant Religion. ills advice
was to let the Noble Lord go on; for if he spoke from day to day
there would be twice as many Petitions upon the table before next
Tuesday than there would otherwise have been.
After a few observations front the Bishop of Murmur and
Lord Rocca,
Lord HOLLAND could not refrain from observing
on.the assertion of a Right Reverend Prelate, that a
great majority or the country was hostile to a measure
which the Ct.mmons of England had twice brought to
their Lordships' Bar, to ask their concurrence in its
enactment. This gave him anew insight into the Con-
stitution. When Reformers preached their doctiines,
he bad been told, and he acquiesced in their opinion,
o there is a national Representation, the House of Com-
mons speaks the sense of-the country, and Public Meet-
ings display the popular feeling." But it seemed that
be had labouted under an error. The Commons, it
now appealed, were not the strict and only organ of the
countt y : they were the mere oligarchy which they had
been represented to be by Reformers However, one
mein of making public. opinion known still remained,
he was glad find. 'lt lay in the Arcbdeaconries, in
the Right. Rev. B:nch opposite, and the Noble and
Learned -Lord on the Woolsack. That Noble mid
Learned lord had now become the tribune of the peo-
ple. It nitght Lave been expected, that he would have
looked to the tight or to the left sides of the House, or
behind him, but who would have thought u: his looking
to the B .r and Palace-yard, and to the people, as those
whom he wished to prow( kt to the discussiot of the
discussion of this great measure! He (Lord Holland)
was still enough of a Reformer, though deemed a luke-
warm one, to beteve that the vote of the House of
Cormons.was the vote of the people; and after a Bill
had been twice passed by that House, how was it pos-
sible for any individual to stand up in his place and to
say that the majority of the country was hostile to a
nreaswe in which one-third of the people.was interested,
and which bad re.eived the sanction of the National
Representation ? Was the sense of the Public to-bccobt.
lected from the letter like Petition presented by the
Right Rev. P.elate, which was not larger than his
baud, and looked mote like a private correspoudence
than a Petition ? He was satisfied, on•comparing the
• present with tot mer petiods, that there was less objec-
tion to it than ever. It was customary to speak of the
United• Kingdom, let their attention be paid to the
wishes of that pact which -we had united to ourselves; it was the
most vulnerable, and an offence given to the feelings of the people
would be most dangerous to the Constitution of the Country and
the pro:polity of the Empire.
'1 tee Petition was then laid upon the ts.ble, as well as one to the
same effect also presented by the Archbishop of ludic,. from the
Clergy of the Archtleadunry of Cleveland, in the County of York.
Similar Petitions were then presented : by the Bishop of Extrxi,
front a Parish in Devonshire; by the Duke of RUTLAND, front
terwintli; by the Earl of CARMARTHEN, from Northampton; by
the F.arl of LIVERPOOL, from the Justices acting in the Eastern part
of the Crudity of Kent, front the town of Chatham, and from a
Parish in Kent; by the Bishop of LorinoN, from Clifton on Duns-
more; from the and Congregation of the Episcopal Cha-
pel in Long-acre; and mom the Clergy, President, and Fellows of
Sion College; by the Bishop of Ss.lJavio's, from the town of New-
port; by the Loan Csessomi.t.oa, from the Parish of Saint James,
Carlitk.bill; by the I; ,r 1 of SHAFTESBURY, from the Elders of the
Presbytery of S'irling ; by the Earl of Cat.stomo, front the Mem-
ber-, tat the Trott start Episcopalian Church of the County of Ty.
tone ; and by the Bishop of ;Lovers/ea, front the Deanery of
Stow, in the County of Gloticesttr.—Laitt on the table.
The Marquis of LANSDOW N held a Petition in favour of
the Catholic Relief Bill. lie did not know whether Noble Lords
would consider it as evidence of the asserted unatiimitr against Ca-
thol.e Emancipation? Ile, for one, regarded it 'as a proof of the
esisteuce of a strong feeling in its favour in one of the largest Pa-
rishes m this Metropolis. It had born adopted in conseqeence of
one Weill.," been priv.tely signed in the sank Parish against the
115 ill; aild lie had the satisf iction to state that it was subscribed by
the Rector and by two his:aired of the principal inhabitants, chiefly
houlaulders, who bad annexed their respective addresses. It Was
front the Perish of St. Luke's.—Latd on the trill-.
Lt.rd COLCHESTER said that he had presented one from the
saire Parish, signed by 500 individuals, against the bill.
Ihe Marquis of LA NSDOWN then presented Petitions in
favour of the front the town irl lkidport, signed by the most
wealth 7 inhabitants, and a majority of the Corporation. From the
Lawn of Eitripton, and front the Protestaiit Diasenters ref the town
of Chichester. Not one of those Petitions would have lite!' pre-
sented, had not Berne hem set 011 loot against the nlrasure which
the present Petitioners thought Might to pass..:—Laid on the table.
Petitions to the sante-effect were then presented:
By Lord Hou.allo--Erogn the Protestant Dissenters in and near
the 'town of Stroud, in the County of Gloucester. From the I'm.
- testant inhabitants IA the town atAl vicinity of Newcioss, and front
the Elden 'Members of the Presbyterian Communion in the

Catholics of the town
the table:
ivrd fcr .4 opy of
Loan Compirty to

STATE OP IRELAND.
Sir Enwa en K Nitwit stmt. and others from theCommous,btonght
a request that their Lordships would communicate to their House,
any further evidence which they might have received on the state
of Ireland.
The LORD CHANCELLOR replied. that their Lordships
would send an answer by messenger: of their own.
The same Members then brought.up the Thrown Silk Bill, the
Irish Court of Chancery Bill, and several private Bills, which were
read-a first time.
The Crosbie Divorce Bill went through a Committee, and was
reported.
Captain Lompoc from the Port of London; Mr. BLVAN, from
the Commercial Dock Company ; Mr. JOHNSON, from the London
Docks; and Mr. FAMKEN, front the East India Docks Companies,
presented accounts of the total number of vessels of every descrip-
tion, and their tonnage, which respectively entered those Ports and
Ducks in 1824.—Laid on the Table.
Adjourned till Monday.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The Report on the West India Bill was brought up by Mr
MANNING.
The further consideration of the Report was postponed to
Monday next.
A Petition was presented from a certain parish in Sussex,against
gni alteration in the Corn Laws.—Laid on the table.
Mr. DOHERTY presented a Petition from New Ross in favour
of the Provincial Banks in Ireland.—Laid on the table.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a Petition from the Sawyers
of Dover, against any alteration in the existing Combination Laws.
—Laid on the table. •
Lord MILTON presented a Petition from Saddlewortb, in
Yorkshire. praying fur a Repeal of the Window 'CAL....Ordered
to be printed.
Mr. HORNBY presented a Petition from the Cotton-spinners
of Preston, againsuthe Bill for regulating the Workmen in Facto-
ries.—Ordered to be printed.
Sir li. INGLIS moved for a Return of the Records printed
by order of the [Pete; and also for an Account of the Number
of Copies distributed, and the Expense attending the same
Agreed to.
Mr. ELLIS brought up the Report of the Committee upon the
assimilation of English and Irish Currency. The Resolutions
were read and agreed to, and a Bill ordered to be brought in per.;
suant to :he same. •
Mr. S. WORTLEY presented a Petition from certain Linen
Merchants, praying for a revision of the laws regulating the trade
in that article.
The Hon. Mennen also presented a Petition from Fifeshire,
praying for inquiry into the case of Mr. Gourley; and also from
an individual of the name of Shelton, complaining of the conduct
of the British Consul at Havre-de-Grace.—Laid on the table.
Mr. BARING -presented a Petition from Birmingham, against
the Western Ship Canal—Laid on the table.
Mr. DENMA N gave notice that on Tuesday next he would
move for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the law respecting
Misdemeanours, so that the plaintiff and defendant should stand
upon an equal footing.
Mr. HUME presented a Petition from the Shipwrights of Sun-
derland, against the Repeal of the Combination Laws.—Laid on
the table, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. WYNkI, in answer to Mr. Hume, stated that no further
intelligence had reached Government from the seat of war in India.

the Elders and i%leinberli of the Presbyterian
' 1
colinttei of Down and Antrim.
• And. by the Luke of Lgessers-,-Frtim the
. of Nais, lathe duuuty of ildate.---Laid 00 1
The Earl of LAUDEIWALE ha
the receipt gisesi,bg the.Ecitlit4ble L
' m
the subscribe's before the Trust Deed was sig