The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1852-06-15 00:00:00

DISTRESS IN JAMAICA

Petiticnft complaining of the distressed state of Jamaica
ere presented by Lord BROUGHAM, and similar petitions
from Antigua, the Mauritius, and from British Guiana.—
The Earl of DERBY said that he had received, not a peti-
tion, but a memorial from clergymen of all denominations
in Jamaica, bearing witness not only to the distress which
prevailed in the colony, but also to the barbarism into
which a large proportion of the coloured community were
rapidly relapsing. In his opinion, the only effectual
remedy for colonial distress would be to stop the progress
of the reduction in the differential duties on sugar ; for,
in spite of the assertion of Lord Grey, he believed that it
was not possible to produce 'sugar by free labour to com-
pete on equal terms with slave labour. At the same time
he confessed that he entertained great doubt whether the
public mind of this country was prepared to sacrifice the
economic interests which might be i

proposition.—The debate was prolonged by Earl GREY,
the Duke of NORTHUMBERLAND, the Bishop of OXFORD,
and the Earl of HARROWBY, after which the matter
dropped, and their lordships adjourned.
FRIDAY, JUNE 11.
GOVERNMENT EDUCATION.

The Earl of DERBY, in reply to a question from the
Marquis of Lansdowne, stated that a minute bad been
agreed to in Privy Council, for the purpose of admitting
to a participation in the grants for national schools in
Ireland those members of the Established Church who
have hitherto been prevented by conscientious scruples

from availing themselves of the- aid so afforded

Marquis of LANSDOWNE complained that no intimation
of the intention of the Government to make this altera-
tion had been given to the House of Commons before the
grant in question was voted.—After some observations
from Earl GREY, the Earl of DERBY expressed his readi-
ness to promise that no money should be applied under
the minute until Parliament should have had an opportu-
nity of expressing, its opinion on the subject.

THE CASE OF THE BARON DE BC

Lord LYNDHURST presented a petition from the Baron
de Bode, a British subject, whose property in France had
been confiscated during the revolution, and who claimed
to be indemnified out of the funds which had been paid
by the French government in liquidation of all such claims
on the part of British subjects. Lord Lyndhurst sup-
ported the petition, and moved the appointment of a se.
lect committee to inquire into the case.—The Earl of
DERBY would not oppose the inquiry, although he feared
it would require a longer period than could be given in
the present session. If the claim could be substantiated,

the House of Commons would doubtless make good the
funds„—Earl GREY opposei the motion, considering a
select committee incompetent to conduct such an inquiry.
—After some further discussion, the motion was agreed to.
SURRENDER OF CRIMINALS (FRANCE) BILL.
_ _

The House then went into committee on the Surrender
of Criminals Convention (France) Bill, when Lord
MALMESBURY proposed several alterations in the mea-
sure, which having been agreed to, the bill passed through
committee. _ _ _

Some other business was also despatched, after which
their Lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TUESDAY, JUNE 8
MAYNOOTIX.

At the morning sitting, the adjourned debate on May-
nooth College was resumed by Mr. FItESHFIELD, who
remarked that the motion for inquiry bad not been op-
posed upon any general ground ; had it been to repeal the
act of 1845, he could understand why it should be resisted,
but all that was asked was an inquiry whether certain
allegations as to the teaching at Maynooth were true, or,
rather, whether there should be an inquiry which, accord-
ing to Mr. Serjeant Murphy, would only redound to the
credit of the college.—Mr. H. HERBERT, in opposing the
motion of Mr. Spooner, proposed to test his sincerity by
inviting him to adopt, instead of that motion, an amend-
ment which he (Mr. Herbert) had put upon the notice
paper, but which he was precluded from moving, to in-
trust the inquiry to the visitors of the college, with such
additional visitation as the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland
might deem necessary—a tribunal constituted by Parlia-
ment, and extremely well adapted for the purpose.—Sir
W. VERNER. supported the motion for inquiry, on the
ground chiefly that the public had a right to know whe-
!key. oi: not
..loctrin stsimpA uthß. colif tat Lop fl p,
supported Mr. Herbert's amendment; and, in a speech
which lasted above two hours, was reviewing the history
of Ireland since the time of Queen Elizabeth, and that of
the college itself since 1795, when four o'clock arrived
and the sitting terminated.

THE CASE OF THE REV. MR. BENNETT

At the evening sitting, Mr. HousmAN moved for a
committee to inquire into the circumstances of the ap-
pointment of Mr. Bennett to the vicarage of Frome,
avowing his motion to be directed not against that gen-
tleman, but against the Bishop of Bath and Wells.—Mr.
GLADSTONE defended the Bishop at great length, insist-
lag on the legality of the course he had pursued, and that
there was nothing in Mr. Bennett's opinions which could
subject him to ecclesiastical censure.—Sir J. PAKINGTON
agreed with Mr. Gladstone that the Bishop of Bath and
Wells was legally justified in the course which he had
pursued ; at the same time he considered that, in the
present state of the Church, it was a great misfortune
that any patron of a living in the Church of England
should have been led, conscientiously he had no doubt,
but most injudiciously, to give so important a benefice as
that of Frome to a person so situated as Mr. Bennett.—
Sir W. PAGE WOOD gave his opinion that Mr. Horsman
had not proved the slightest infringement of the law.—
Col. BOYLE stated facts which cast doubts on the alleged
popularity of Mr. Bennett at Frome. But this, he re-
marked, was not the question. If Mr. Bennett was popu-
lar and his doctrine was unsound, the mischief be would
do must be the greater.—Mr. YORKE gave some explana-
tions respecting the feelings of the parishioners of Frome,
and declared that Mr. Bennett was as good a churchman
as Mr. Horsman bimsclf.—Sir B. HALL commented with
severity on Mr. Bennett's past religious career.—Mr.
NEWDEGATE suggested a compromise, but the motion
was insisted upon by Messrs. ELLICE, MOODY, and
DEEDES, when Mr. GOULIWRN moved an amendment
which would divert the inquiry into the state of the law
respecting the institution to benefices.—Adivision ensued,
when the original motion was carried by 156 against 111,
amidst loud cheers.

On the reporters re-entering the gallery, Mr. 811,0-
THERTON had moved the adjournment of the house. A
conversation ensued as to the course to be taken with the
Maynooth debate, in the course of which Mr. NEwon-
GATE said that those hon. gentlemen who desired to speak
on the subject of Maynooth had had sufficient opportunity
to discuss the question. The proceedings of that morn-
ing, and the present motion of the hon. member for Sal-
ford, justified the idea that it was desired to defeat the
motion by factious opposition: (Hear, hear.) He gave
notice that when they came to the order of the day re-
specting the Maynooth inquiry, he should divide the
house on it without any further adjournment of the de-
bate.—With this understanding the house adjourned.
WEDNESDAY, JuNE 9.