Star.
London, England, 1825-06-15 00:00:00

1 _
r ,iY
; .
t ~
'lf ;j1: 1
1 :

was passing in the Coukts of Justice, it would be but
justice to all parties come:fled in such Companies as
this. that the deeds should form part of all future Bills.
It was fleawort that the contents of such deeds should be known
to all parties, or the Legislature roust decide upon altering the,
practice of the Courts of Law.
The Mike of ATHOL spoke in favour of The Coin"
pan;. He concurred wi-h his Noble and Learned
Friend on the woolsack, that it might be advisable to make its.
anocladon deeds a part of Bills of this kind in future, but he
thought it hard to begin with this Bill. Other Rule of a similar
charactensad passed without being subject to this coodltion.
The LORD CHANCELLOR would be extremely'
sorry to say anything disrespectful to indivi Wats. He
would therefore say nothing with respect to the deed and the Bill,
which he did not ntrao to condemn; but he would'say, that be
would take no conveyancers or profes sinial man's opinion before
th it of the twelve Judges of England.
The conversation here dropped. The VIII was ordered to be
committed to-morrow. It was understood that the deed was to
be incorporated with it in the Committee.
Adjourned at HALIC-rAST SKY= O'CLOCK.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.

A person from the Irish Secretary's edam presented a return of
the number of freeholders in the counties of Galway and Sligo,
which was ordered to b. printed.
On the motion of Lord GaAs:mei floweasee, the Western Ship
Canal Mil was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. S. Wes, the I3il to enable the bipedal
Mining Company of Ireland to sue and be sued was reads third
time and pawed.
sip °tura TION OP 111 ACH in any.
Mr. LITI'LETON presented a Petition from the in-
habitants of N ntingham, playing that no alteration
might be made in the laws prohibiting the exportation
of machinery. Amongst the evils which would result
from suffering the exportation of machinery. might be
principally leckosed IS inventions in mechanics, now
exclusively known to English manufacturers, but which
would be thereby lost to the country ; while even on
the principle s! reciptocity, the latter could be no
gainers. because the French had but three inventions in
mechanism which were unknown to the English. The
Petitioners concluded by stating, that if the exportation of machi-
nery were allowed, according to the new doctrine of free trade,
they should then consider themselves citizens of the world. and
emigrate to such parts of the world as their machinery might be
sent nod,
Mr. 'Alderman WOOD supported the prayer of the Petitioners,
which he thought worthy of the most serious consideration.
Mr. HUSKISSON said, that it was doubtless a mea-
sure of great importance, and he was aware that con-
siderable alarm prevailed amongst the manufacturers,
lest the exportation of machinery should be allowed.
Still he thought that the labours of the Committee upon
the subject would not prove wholly unavailing, in ascertaining how
far the prosperity of the country was indebted to the manufacturers
of machinery. At all events, lie was not disposed to abolish the
?resale laws at a sweep, without further enquiry, more particu-
lady at a time when alarm upon the subject seemed to be so
very prevalent.
Mr. HUME was convinced, that imaginary- fears of.
the results of the exportation of machinery prevailed to
a greater extent than they had any evidence of, and
although his opinion was unaltered, yet, in deference to
• the prejudices of the manufacturers. however erroneous.
be thought it would be unwise to proceed directly, in allowing the
eSportatioo. He was also of opinion. that the prosperity of the
country was at least as much owing to other causes as to oar se.
perierity in mechanism. He hoped that time would be given for
the-consideration of the Report of the Committee, and that the
Mouse might be enabled. in the nut Session, to proceed, unshackled
by the prejudices by which they were at present impeded.
for. BA RING said, that his opinions coincided with those of
the Member for Aberdeen, as far as deterring to the prejudices of
men, who, even if in error. were still Men of information, and
whose opinions were at least worthy of attention.
Mr. T. WILSON concurred in the same opinion.
After a few words from Mr. Lawler. Mr. PIULUIPS. and Mr.
EMS. the Petition was brought up and ordered to be printed.
COMBINATION LAWS.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY, in answer to a question from
Mr. Ellice, said, that he expected to be enabled to lay
b" fore the (louse to-morrow, or the next day, the Re.
pert 'of the Committee upon the Combination Laws,
and that he would also be prepared to introduce a
masers founded upon that Report.
Mr. HUSKISSON wished, when the measure was
introduced, that the discussion should be postponed
yaw the eseond reading.
Mr. ELLICE said, that would depend upon the
measure itself, as he should feel bound to oppose it if
it went to revive the former laws; but it should have
his support if it went to leave Combinations open to the
Common Law.
Mr. WALLACE said, that it would do neither, but
would tend equally to suppress Combinations on the
put of Masters as well as Journeymen.
KR. SENDRWIC, THs wELCS JUDGE.
Mr. DENMAN presented a Petition from a person
named .Caufor, against a Surrey Magistrate named
Kendrick, who was also a Judge of the Principality of
Wales. No Judge had ever been made the subj.ct of
such a motion as he was then about to make, most
probably because no Judge had ever deserved to be so.
The charge against Mr. Kendrick was founded upon
affidavits; ;.id, although the oppressed individual had
received damages in a Court of Justice, yet, as the per-
sonal injury was trivial, compared with the public
misconduct of the individual, be thought the House
should investigate the conduct of that individual, pos-
sessing as lie did a high office in the administration of
public justice./ He should not, then. unless required
to do SO, enter into the merits of the Petition, but move,
it, the first plate, that the Petition, and the affidavits
or which it was grounded, should be printed, that the Members
themselves might bait: an Opponuaity of weighing the case before
it zarne under discussion.
Mr. DENISON said, that Mr. Kendrick was a
near neighbour of his, and that be could bear testimony
to his character in private life. He hoped that the
House would suspend its judgment until it had heard
both sidei of the question. He wished to state that
Mr. Kendrick had an objection to the printing of the affidavits, prier
to the Rouse being in possession of the matter which is contained
Mr. Secretary PEEL said. the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman bad given an intimation of his in-
tention to call upon the House to exercise an important
privilege- which it possessed—that of addressing the
Crown- to' remove in individual, independent of its
power under any other authority than that of a vote of
that House. He *oulti not throw any paltry inspedi-
L-eitt'in the way of such a motion, if the individual de-
ice it. He would, however?. put it to the Hon.
sad Learned Gentleman, *tether he thought he could prisceed
during the present Session; and. if not, whether it would not be
..unfair to Feint them biz months before any measire cenld be
founded open than?
1.11% 14N bIAN replied, that by thought the probable duration
G..
EDc want Session of l'arliam nt would afford sufficient time for
loro;edure.
said. that
Ciro • character

0111711 CW WIZ

colud not Parliament do the same? Church property
belonged to a corporation. It could not be alienated by
sale, nor be bequeathed' by will. Wizen a Clergyman
died, the law resumed the rights it had imparted, and
no one was injured thereby. What was the object of
Church property ?—the instruction of the people. This
had been tried in Leland, lied failed. Only one-four-
teenth of the Irish population was Protestant, and the
other thit teen-fourteenths Catholic. There were more
and they
loPor
go tinaont
be Cr
el edrogeyemd
,eans t
bh
aa
bweeerne
fnoerme
es sr
lyr ca,y
done in the
case of the Irish Bishops, when the Sees were consoli-
dated. Ten parishes were sometimes united into one
benehee, and he thought tut the twenty-two Bishop-
rics might be consolidated into four. Four Bishops
teould be quite enough to perform the duties which now
deviilved on the twenty-two. If this change were made,
a hat a vast saving in expense there would be to the
country. If the L"gislature would resume this pro.
perry into their own hands, a fund would be created,
nut of which the inferior Clergy might be liberally
paid, and a large saving effected to the country.
The Honourable Member here referred to the estimates
of Mr. Wakefield, to shew the great value of the lands
possessed by the Church. In seven Dioceses only, there
was land to the value of 2713,0001. a year, if resumed
by the Crown, and let to individuals. Here was a large
fund which might be made applicable to the religious
education of the people. He next adverted to a public
speech of the Bishop of Limerick, and delivered in the
House of Lords, and defended the correctness of the
itatements he had made of the number of non-resident
Clergy, which, on the authority of returns on the table,
he had stated at 551. But the Right Reverend Bishop
urged, that a persUn holding five or six livings, and
residing at one of them, was not to be held as absent
from the others. But that was not the ground of his
complaint; what he stated was, that they were not at
their posts; the duty was done by deputy. The land
in possession of the Bishops was very valuable land,
and worth, in one Diocese 20s. per acre. This Diocese
had 51,000 acres, which made 51,0001. per annum.—
Now it was well known that the' Bishops 'interest was
only one-third of what it would be worth if in the
hands of the State. From this calculation it would
appear that this Dioce.e would be worth 150.0001. per
annum. The Honourable Gentleman then4enumerated
the value of the different Dioceses. The Honourable
Member concluded by saying, that he should propose
two resolutions; the one declaring the property of the
Church of Ireland to be public property, under the
controul of Parliament, and applicable to such pur-
poses u it may think most conducive to the interests of religion,
and of the community at large; the second, pledging the Houle to
inquiry, as to how tar the same may be dealt with, with a view to
a reduction of the Establishment in the next Seseion? Upon the
latter resolution, the Honourable Member expressed his determi-
nation to take the sense of the House. ,
Sir F. BURDET'r seconded the motion. •
Mr. Secretary CANNING said, that however much
he might be inclined to find fault with the Honourable
Member for Aberdeen for the tone of his speech, and
the proposition which he had brought forward, he
could not say of him that he had gone about his busi-
ness in a covert way—that he had kept back any free
and frank explanation of the experiment which he had
wished to prevail upon the House to try with respect
to the Church Establi htnent of Ireland. He must do
the Hon. Member the justice fo say, that'll' had plainly
and freely stated the object he had in view, which had
been imputed to others on former occasions, as the ne-
cessary result of their arguments, but which he did not
recollect any individual but the Hon. Member for
Aberdeen to have boldly avowed and placed in the
front of the battle. Before he submitted to the House a very few
observations, he would request the Clerk to read the article of the
Act of Union which related to theCherch Establishment in Ireland.

The Clerk then read the fifth ankle of the Act of Union, which
declared, that the Churches of /LogiAnd and Ireland should be
united In one Protestant Episcopalian Church,to be subject to the
same laws, and that arrangement should be taken so be a funds.
mental part of the Union.
Mr. Secretary CANNING resumed.—lt was an
advantage that in coming to the consideration of the
question, the House were placed in no circumstances of
uncertainty, they were not absorbed in mystery and
forgotten time. The sense of the Legislature
.on the
subject was not to be gathered from Statutes the con-
struction of which might be doubtful, or which might
be ineffective from disuse ; but they had a clear dis:
tint authority, only 25 years old, to compare with
the Hon. Member's Resolution, and to help them in
coming to a decision, as to whether it was possible to
pass that resolution consistently with the law laid down
in that Statute; and, what was more, consistently with
the compact which that Statute was intended to re-
cord and enforce—( Hear). Ile thought he should
have the admission of the Honourable Umber himself
that the Statute to which he had referred stood in his
way. The Honourable Member had, to be sure, ex-
pressed his disapprobation of the settlement made at
the Union ; but with respect to the state of the 1.4 w,
there could be no dispute. The compact „which had
been made at the Union might be broken ; but until
that was done, it became Parliament to act with ;pod
faith on their part.
.Parliament could nt t, without a
v!olation, which would lead to the apprehension of
violations of all kinds, concur in the resolution of the
Hon. Member, which went to put out of the purview
of the settlement made at the Union, the whole of the
property of the Church of Ireland, and to declare that
.it was a thing with which Parliament had a right to
deal as it thought fit. The difficulty of the Hon.
Mover's case was, that it went directly against all that
hitherto bad been considered as established. The
chutes property of Ireland might be compared to a
leeeporate property, which had beta revised and con-
ferred by get of Parliament ; but the Hon. Mover
seemed to think that he had a right to go back to a pe-
riod antecedent to the establishment of a right to the
'property on the part of the Church, and when it (the
property) remained to be distributed among mankind
for the benefit of particular classes. If the House
should agree to the Hon. Member's resolution, there
,was nothiag to prevent them from seizing upon pro.
perry of Corporations. Then, again, why was the House
to stop with the tithes of the Church ? Why not, also,
possess themselves of the lay tithes ?—(Hear, hear.) In
,bart, the proposition of the Hon. Member was so mon-
.trous, so likely to lead to the most alarming conse-
quences, that it was, he was sure, quite impossible
that the House could for a moment hesitate as to
the course which they should pursue reg siding it.—
The Hon. Member had, in the cour of hF speech,

such a proceeding which origintted much of the GDpn.
sition to the Catholic Claims. Ile was, there'ruip,
rather pleased that the Hon. Gentleman had atrattlei
the House an opportunity of *hewing how they wo,lll
meet any such proposition. He was confidzot that the
vote to which they were about to come, would tran-
quillize any fears which might be entertained oitthe
subject. The Right Hon. Gentleman conclucltd iry
characterizing the motion of the Hon. Member itn•
Aberdeen as one of the most barefaced proposition'i
injustice that had ever been submitted to I)..rliamenr.
His GM belief was, that to such a resolution the llon. Memb, r
would find few supporters in that House ; and still fewer--er
(Mr. Canning) was much mistakea—in the country.
Sir F. BURDETT contended, that the Right Firsr.
Gentleman who preceded him had net foilowed hit
Hon. Friend through what he called the lahyrintil
his speech, because the facts of which it comiaed wcret
unanswerable. Neither would he allow that the Right
Hon. Gentleman had made out the propositions uroti
which he grounded his opposition to the motion. he
article of the Act of Union which had been read, di .1
not apply to the maintenance of the property, but the
religion of the Church. The compact implied by that
Act was not violated, if those who were the parties to
it mutually consented either to its entire removal, or try
any particular alteration. He-did not mean to pledge
bimseli to everything that may be proposed in connec-
tion with this subject, but he thought an enquiry w.ts
demanded by the situation of the country. The reso-
lutions he considered to be perfectly harmless, and if
they applied to private property, he should be equally ready to
give them his acquiescence.
kt TRANT opposed the motion.
M. Alderman WOOD made a few observations in explanatinn
el' *bat the Right lion. °cadent= opposite had done him the ho.
sour to aUude to.

Mr. Secretary PEEL thought the lion. Baronet had
entirely failed to shake the propositions of
Hon. Friend. In other parts of the Act of Union be-
sides the Article which had been read to the House, tl,o
present Government and Constitution of the Church of
Ireland was fully recognised. and particularly in that
part which provided lor the sitting of the Bishops as
Representative Peers. He was surprised to hear the
Honourable Baronet speak as he had done of this Act
of Union, when he bad not long ago brought a Bill
into the House framed by himself, which set out by
declaring it permanent and invi Table; so that what-
ever contempt he might now entertain for the Act of
Union, he certainly at that time was satisfied- to rest his
measure upon the corner-stone of its permanency and
inviolability. But the Hon. Member proposed, in a
somewhat singular phraseology. that the Bishops should
be " doubled up"—(Near, from Sir F. Bardeit). He
did not mean to say that the Hon. Baronet was going
to " double them up''—he was sure that was an eaptes-
sion which the Hon. Baronet would be the last to use—
(Much laughing). It was the Honourable Member for
Aberdeen who meant to double the Bishops up; and
his mode of" doubling up" was a remarkably odd one.
There were twenty-four Bishops in Ireland, and the
Honourable Member thought they ought to be
" doubled up" to two—(Laughter). He considered two
quite enough; but feeling that he had to deal wi h a
prejudiced House, he consented, in the excess of his
liberality, to double his two up to four. Tile Hoak
Baronet admitted the principle that Church property
was equally Sacred with that of private lodividuals. But then he
declared himself ready to support these Retsolutions, which be eon.
adored perfectly harnaleskes applied to private property ; and yet
thellesolutloo.bepo by stating that" the property of the Church ol ,
Ireland Is public property." The Right Hon. Gentleman impressed
his willingness to enforce the strict performance of the duties Odle
Church by its members, but be would never consent to principle,
which sancdoned a violation of its lawful rights and possesostes.
Mr. BROUGHAM contended that there was an es-
sential distinction between the property of the Church •
.and that of individuals. The pro.; erty of the Church
was sold by its members not as private individuals hut
as members of a public body. He did not wish to be- •
come an advocate for spoliation, but that was no reason
why he should not look at the subject with a statesman.
like view. It was monstrous to say they were never
to legislate with a view to the disposal of Church pro-
perty. In making arrangements for tithes, was it pos-
sible to satisfy all clerical persons ? No, it was not, and
Parliament must therefore legislate upon a general
principle. They had been told to wait for information,
and he thought there was no disposition to urge the
subject rapidly into discussion. If a pledge were gives
to bring forward the subject next year. his Honourable
Friend would not press his motion. He should recom-
mend his Honourable Friend to give up the Ant, and take the
sense of the House upon his second Resolution. He could siet ace
hew the House could refuse a promise to go Into the Isesdea nest
Session of Parliament.
Redeem ONSLOW, to the unqualMed assertions of his Hon.
and Learned Friend respecting Church property, pve his dissent.
Mr. HUME made a brief reply, amidst a loud and general call
for the Question, which was pot and negatived without a division.
Mr. HU MR :hen moved a Resolution, pledging the House to
appoint a Committee early neat Session, to inquire into the aatuut
of Church property in Ireland.
Upon the question there was a division of the House.
Ayes • • 37
Non • 126
—BO

't
Majoriy

Mr. MONCK withdrew his Bill respecting the Wages of L.
bourers till next Session.
The Customs' Regulation Bill went through a Committee.
Thesecond reading of the Bubble Act was postponed toThorsday.
On the Order of the Day being read.for the third reading of the
shooting and stabbing (Scotland) Bill,
Mr. R. GORDON objected to the bringing on, at so late an
hour of the night. a Bill of its much importance. Indeed, it so hap-
pened that business of very great interest was rarely brought
before the House until a very late hour.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that as the
private business was now very nearly got through, he thought that
in future business of a public nature might be commenced at half-
past four in the afternoon.—The reading of the Bill *was postponed.
The House adjourned at TEN filisuras *mai Owe ()Twit.

Capt.KoTzeamt, after contending with terrible storms
in the South Seas, arrived, on the 29th of June, last year,
at St. Peter and 'St. Paul's harbour, in Kamtschatki,
whence he sailed, on the Ist August, for Silka.
Accounts from Stockholm state, that complaints are
made of the new tariff, because it enjoins too many
formalities for the valuation of the goods.
It is remarkable that the disea e which prevailed in
the winter among the horses in Denmark; and which wits
an inflammation in the lungs, was by Ito means coma.
gious. Of 1,256 horses that were under the care of the
Veterinaty Instituti.ms for the cuts of this.disorder,
re-
veutyseven died.
Mr. Graham yesterday made his 24th ascelt from
the Bedford Arms Tavern, Camden Town. He was
accompanied by two females, Mrs; Graham and lei $