The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-07-31 00:00:00

Entperial VarliamEnt.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—WEDNESDAY.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.
Lord J. RUSSELL, in moving the 'order of the day for the
house going into a committee of supply, stated that, in con-
sequence of the absence of his right hon. friend, the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer, he only proposed going into committee
to enable au hon. and gallant officer to make the statement
to the house of which he had given notice: they should then
immediately resume, for the purpose of postponing the com-
mittee of supply till Friday.
Sir E. CODRI?4GTON called the attention of the house to
the officers of her Majesty's navy, compared with those of the
other branches of the public service. The gallant admiral
complained of the paltry anaonnt of pay and retiring pen-
sions allowed to the officers of the navy. That service, he
said, which had gained such important and glorious sucesses
for the British arms, was placed on a lower footing in this
respect than any other branch of the public service. Officers
of high rank, who had commanded ships against the enemies
of their country, and performed the most brilliant exploits,
were condemned in peace to a life of embarrassment and
difficulties, with a half-pay less than the pension of some
petty clerk in an office of the civil departtnent of the adminis-
tration. The gallant admiral, in support of his statement,
proceeded to detail' to the house the amount of half-pay of
the various ranks of the navy, comparing the sums with those
received by officers of the military and civil department.
The hon. and gallant officer moved " That a select com-
mittee be appointed to take into consideration the case of
officers in her Majesty's navy as compared with those of other
branches of .he public service."
Mr. C WOOD said his reason for opposing, the motion was
this—early this session a committee was appointed to take
this very subject under their consideration. He did not
think, therefore, that they ought to appoint a committee of
that house for the purpose of effecting- the self-same object;
for the commission, as he conceived, fully embraced the whole
subject of the pay and rewards of officers of the army, navy,
and marines. He believed that the service never was in a
better state than at that moment. (Hear, hear.) They had
twenty sail of the line at sea; and he would venture to say,
that they liked they could send out ten times that number
of ships, if they could' find men to man them. (Hear, hear.)
But, in fact, the mistakes of his hon. and gallant friend were
so great and so many, that he (Mr. C. Wood) hardly knew
what assertion to contradict, unless he contradicted them

au.
Captain PECHELL complained that naval officers bad not a
fair share of public appointments. They would see by the
Gazette even that while there were but six naval officers
raised to the order of knights of the bath, a whole column
was filled with the names of office's of the army and East
India Company, upon whom that distinction was conferred.
After a discussion, in which some recent promotions in the
naval service were complained of on the one hand and justi-
fied on the other, the amendment was withdrawn, and the
committee of supply was postponed until Friday.
On the order of the day for the second reading of the spirit
licenses (Ireland) bill being read, an hon. member moved
that the house he counted. Strangers were ordered to with-
draw, and, only thirty-three members being present, the
house adjourned at half-past seven.

HOUSE OF LORDS—THURSDAY.
CHURCH DISCIPLINE BILL
Lord MELBOURNE moved the order of the day for the third
reading of this bill.
The Bishop of EXETER rose toeppose the further progress
of this bill, which he characterised as one of the heaviest
blows ever aimed at the protestant church of this country.
The bill proposed to prevent any ecclesiastical court, except
the Court of Arches in London, from passing any sentence
of excommunication or degradation against the clergy. Now,
he contended. there was an inherent jurisdiction in every
Christian bishop, of which no legislature could deprive them.
The Bishops' court were as old as Christianity itself With-
out depriving a bishop of his see, human laws could not de-
prive him of the right, or absolve him from the duty, to ex-
ercise the jurisdiction which his office enjoined; and, for
himself, he declared solemnly that he should not feel at li-
berty to obey the provisions which this bill contained, should
it pass into a law. He should continue, in that event, to call
upon the clergy of his diocese to answer to him for any
crimes of which they might be accused; and if a clergyman
disobeyed him, he would pronounce sentence of excommu-
nication against him. Their lordships might pass a bill of
pains and penalties against him; they might deprive him of
his gown and mitre; but his " robe and his integrity to
Heaven," no human power should or could take from him.
The right rev. prelate denounced what he denominated the
monstrous injustice of a measure which would transfer all
that power which properly belonged to the bishops of the
church and to the Archbishop of York to one court, the
Court of Arches. It was a measure affecting the most im-
portant interests and essential functions of the clergy, on be-
half of whom he earnestly appealed to their• lordships. The
clergy of this country had not yet had an opportunity of
knowing one fraction the provisions of the bill. If it was a
bill for the regulation of master chimneys Weepers, it would
have been proceeded with in a more patient and careful
spirit. He did not believe that their lordships would grant
a third reading to the bill, but that they would rather agree
with him when he proposed that it should be read a third
time that day six months. •
'During the prelate's speech, Marshal Soult came into the
house, and stood below the throne, immediately behind the
woolsack.]
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said, if hard words and
insinuations could secure the fate of this bill, its doom might
be considered as sealed. The measure, however, bad not
been framed without consulting the entire bench of bishops;
for no fewer than two preliminary meetings had taken place,
which were numerously attended. (Hear.) Upon one of
those occasions the right rev. prelate had attended, and ob-
jected to the bill, but certainly not in the strong terms of
reprobation which he had chosen that night to employ,
nor any thing like the same terms. There was, he be-
lieved, only one other prelate who objected to the bill,
upon that occasion, and who did so simply on the ground,
that he was satisfied with the working of his own court.
He (the Archbishop of Canterbury) was requested by
that body of bishops to carry the heads of the bill to the
Lord Chancellor, as having received their approbation.
No remedy could be proposed for the existing evils which
were admitted, that would not be met by objections from
some parties; but still he held that the principles on which
the'bill was now opposed by the right rev. prelate were erro-
neously founded, and,that, as no mode of amendment could
be expected to give universal satisfaction, he trusted that
their lordships would now allow the bill to be read a third
time.
Lord BROUGHAM opposed the b ill, observing that its author
could not be serious to asking the house to pass it. The
principles on which the most rev. prelate had supported the
bill might do very well fur a former age, but they would not
do for the present day. Let the most reverend prelate go
before his colleagues and argue the question, which he was
certain he could not do,—let him produce their authority,
and the authority of reason for this bill, if he could.
The Bishop of LisicoLN, in a few words, supported the bill.
Lord WY:stimuli recommended the withdrawal of the bill

for the present session, pointing out several objectionable
points in the project which required alteration.
The Duke of WELLINGTON, adopting the suggestion of

Lord Wynford, decidedly recommended the postponement
of the measure till a future period in the present session, or
till the next session of parliament.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought, if the third reading were
delayed now, that there would be a risk of even another ses-
sion passing before there was any reform in ecclesiastical
jurisdiction. _

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said, that nothing that
- - • •

he had heard advanced against the bill had shaken his opi-
nions respecting the desirableness of its passing into law;
but as the sense of the house seemed to be against the bill,
he was not disposed to urge the measure, and would therefore
consent to its being withdrawn.
The bill was then ordered to be read a third time that day
six months.
The Affirmation Bill was read a second time.
On the motion or Viscount MELBOURNE, the Commons'
amendments upon the amendments of the Lords to the Poor
Relief (Ireland) Bill were considered, and severally agreed
to, with the exception of an amendment in the schedule,
from which the Lords disagreed; and a committee having
been appointed to draw up reasons for the disagreement, the
same were drawn up and agreed to, and a conference with
the Commons was fixed for next day.
The Slave Vessels Captured Bill, after a discussion be-
tween Lords COLCHESTER, BROUGHAM, and MINTO, was
read a third time and passed.
The Irish Chancery Bill was committed, after which, at
one o'clock, the house adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY.
CONDUCT OF THE SCARBOROUGH CLERGY.

Mr. CHARLES LtiSHINGTON presented a petition from five
inhabitants of Scarborough, praying for protection against
the operation of a notification signed by the vicar and cler-
pman of that place, relating to the registry of births, and
burials in church yards. These clergymen asserted, that the
act for the registry of the births did not give sufficient evi-
dence of a person's being baptised; and they also stated,
that they should refuse in future to read the service for the
burial of the dead on any corpse, unless they were satisfied
the person was entitled to receive Christian burial; and also
that they would make full inquiry previous to the corpse be-
ing brought into the church-yard, in order to satisfy them-
selves on that point. The petitioners prayed that the inha-
bitants of Scarborough, and other parishes in the neighbour-
hood, might be protected by law from the operation of such
resolutions framed by a portion of the members of the esta-
blished church. _

[During the presentation of some petitions, Marshal Soult,
attended by his son, the Marquis Dalmatia, and the Marquis
de Mornay, with others attached to his suite, entered the
house, and were conducted by the Deputy Sergeant to the
benches below the bar appropriated to the distinguished
strangers.l

sacrifice of money • but really the government had left in it
one ingredient, which, he feared, would take away the pros-
pect of tranquillity. He referred to the by-gone arrears, and
exempting from the operation of the bill those cases in which
suits had been already instituted. Those were the cases, in
fact, which had created the greatest' irritation; and he rose
chiefly to put on record his solemn opinion in that respect.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the only way in which they
could finally settle this matter fairly, as regarded the public
purse, and effectually as regarded the peace of Ireland, was
by following the plan laid down in the bill. It was perfectly
competent for the House of Lords, if they thought fit; to -re-
ject this part of the arrangement; but it was not competent
for them to alter or modify it, the House of Commons hav-
ing decided on applying a certain portion of the public mo-
ney to a particular purpose. The House of Lords would ac-
cept it in an entire state, inasmuch as it would very greatly
mitigate the evils with which tithe conflicts had- tormented
Ireland. He could not expect that the people of Ireland
would refuse a bill which, while it rendered the church more
secure, would relieve the great mass from an oppressive and
vexatious burden.—(Hear, hear.)
The house divided, when the numbers were—For the
amendment 30; against 14, 148: majority, 118.
So the amendment was lost, and the bill was read a third
time.
Lord MORPETH brought up clauses, which were added to

the bill by way of rider':
Several verbal amendments being proposed in clause 38,
Mr. H UME moved the exclusion of this clause, as it sanctioned
the disbursement of three sums-4610,000, which had been
advanced as a loan ; £lOO,OOO, advanced for public works ;
and £260,000, which was now to be granted; amounting to
£1,000,000 sterling►.
Mr. HARVEY seconded the amendment.
The house then divided, when there appeared—For the
amendment, 39 ; again4t it, 96 : majority, 57.
Some verbal amendments were then inserted; after which
the bill was passed.

MAILS ON RAILROADS BILL.
Mr. LABOUCHEUE moved the third reading of this bill.
Mr. EASTHOPE objected to the measure as an invasion of
the rights of private property.
The bill was then teal a third time.
Mr. LABOUCHERE brought up a clause, by way of' rider,
limiting the responsibility of lessees of railroads to £lOOO in
any one year; which after a few words from Mr. A. YATES,
was agreed to.
The bill was then passed.

CUSTOMS BILL

The house went into eommittee on this bill ; and the
various clauses having been" agreed to, the tiou•se resumed,
and the report was ordered to be received next day. The
Oaths Validity Bill was read a second time. The other orders
of the day were then disposed tif;'and the•house adjourned at
two o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-FRIDAY.
ROYAL ASSENT.

The royal assent by commission was given to forty-four
public and private bills, with the accustomed formalities, in
the presence of the Speaker and other Members or the House
of Commons. The• Lords Commissioners who officiated on
the present occasion were the Lord Chancellor, the Marquis
of Lansdowne, and the Earl of Shaftesbury.
The following is the list of the bills :—The Glass Duties
Bill, 'Administration of Justice (New South Wales) Bill,
Qualification of Members Bill, Judges Jurisdiction Extension
Bill, Waterloo Annuities Bill. Vagrants Acts Amendment
Bill, Slave Vessels Capture Bill, Slave Trade (Netherlands)
Bill, Dean Forest Encroachments Bill, Dean Forest Mines
Bill, Western Australia Act Continuance Bill, Suitors' Mo-
ney Bill, Edinburgh and Leith Agreement Bill, Grand Jury
Cess (Dublin) Bill, Oaths to Witnesses (Ireland) Bill, County
Treasurers (Ireland) Bill, Kingstown and Dublin Port and
Harbour Bill, Festiniog Railway Bill, Eastern Counties
Railway Bill, Birmingham and Derby Railway Bill, Far-
riugtou-street improvement Bill, New Quay (Cornwall)
Harbour Bill, Fishguard Harbour (No. 2) Bill, Glasgow
Waterworks Bill, Lough Foyle Drainage Bill, Pembroke
Ferry Bill, Blackheath Small-Debts Bill, Ashby-de-la-Zouch
Small Debts Bill, Barnsley Small- Debts Bill, National
Loan Fund Life Assurance Bill, Wortley Ormley, &c.,
Road Bill, Dudley Hild, &c., Road Bill, Hubback's Estate
Bill, Grey's Estate Bill, All Souls College Estate Bill,
Leigh's Estate Bill, Paddington Estates Bill, Sudbury Town
Lands Bill, Portfield Allotment Bill, Bathyany's Natural-
isation Bill, and Grohte's Naturalisation Bill.
The Lords Commissioners then quitted their seats, and the
Speaker, with the Members of the Commons, retired.
• The Lord Chancellor then took his seat on the woolsack.

CONFERENCE.

Upon the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, a message
was sent to the Commons requsting a conference on the sub-
ject of the amendment made by the Commons in the Irish
Poor Relief Bill. _ .

The managers appointed on the part of ther lordships were,
the Earl of Shaftesbury, the Earl of Liverpool; the Earl of
Charleville, Viscount Hawarden, the Bishop of Hereford.
Lord Hatherton, and Lord Portman.

On their lordship's return, after a short absence,
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY stated that they had left their
lordship's reasons for disagreeing with the amendment with
the managers of the conference on the part of the Commons.
At a subsequent period of the evening, Mr. BERNAL, and
other Members of the Commons, brought up a message,
stating, "that the Commons do not insist on the amendment
made in the bill to the amendments made by your lordships."
On the motion of the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, copies of
the correspondence of Sir De Lacy Evans and others, regard-
ing the claims of the Spanish Legion, were ordered to be
presented.
Lord BROUGH A5l presented a bill (inconsequence of the
failure of Sergeant 'ralfourd's meastire, of which he did not
entirely approve, on the subject of "Copyrights," for facili
tating appeals as well as for the prolongation of copyright
It was read the first time, and ordered to be printed.
The tithes (Ireland) bill and the snails on railways b

were brought tip from 'the Commons. The tithes (Ireland)
bill, on motion of Lord MELBou tom, was read the first time,
and the second reading fixed for Tuesday.
Lord LYNDHURST having inquired why the abstracts of
municipal accounts, ordered by the act, had not been laid
before parliament,
Lord Alci.aounNE answered that he would inquire i nt
the cause.

Lord BROUGHAM, in answer to the Marquis of Westmin-
ster's inquiry, said that he should press his Beer Act Amend
ment Bill as far as possible this session.
The Marquis of LON DON DERR y , after there had been con-
siderable conversation between the Marquis of Downshire
and Lord Plunkett, regarding the dismission of an Irish ma-
gistrate named Corry, said that. he would submit a motion on
the subject.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid upon the table a report
from the commissioners regarding railways inJreland.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
Lord MELBOURNE moved the third reading of the Munici-
pal Corporations (Ireland) Bill, which led to some animated
discussion.
Lord BROUGHAM complained that any qualification was
introduced into the bill, as the English act had worked so
well, producing tranquillity everywhere.
The DUKE of WELLINGTON said that he had from the first
been for putting an end to the Irish corporations, instead of
retaining them as the means of agitation; and that he could
not join in the panegyric on the working of the English
Corporations Act, for he believed it to have produced squab-
bling all the year round, and to have as little promoted the
security of property as the peace of social life.
The bill was read the third time and passed.—Adjourned.