The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-07-12 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

Emperial 13arliaratnt.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—WEDNESDAY.
After the presentation of souse petitions the house was
counted out, and no further business was transacted.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY.

Mr. WlLics presented a petition regarding the snttling
,ousel at the Horse Guards, Tilbury Fort, andvarious barracks,
for which rents were paid to officers, and praying that as they
were built and repaired at the public expense, the said rents
might flow into the public treasury.
Sir J. Ginn am suggested, as private business concluded
very early, the house should in future proceed to the orders of
the day at half-past four o'clock.
Lord J. RUSSELL agreed to the proposition; it was put to
the vote, and adopted.
Mr. WILES directed attention to the curious fact that the
"‘ declaration" still remained in the marriages bill sent from the
Commons to the Lords, although it had been negatived on a
division of 67 ayes and 180 noes: the declaration was for those
who had conscientious scruples against the religious cere-
monies. The error had created great agitation among the dis-
senters, and they declared that they would rather not have the
bill than have it with such declaration.
After some conversation with Lord J. RUSSELL, it was
agreed to submit a motion on the subject to-day, for a message
to get back the bill to correct the error.
RAILROAD TOLLS. _ .

Mr. BAINES wished to know whether it was the intention of
the hon. member for Ipswich (Mr. Morrison) to proceed this
session with his bill for the periodical revision of the tolls upon
railways. There was a strong impression out of the house that
this was a very extraordinary proceeding. He wished to know
whether it was the intention of the hon. member to proceed
with this bill, feeling as he must that it was not approved of out
of the honSe ?
Mr. MottaisoN answered that he had no hesitation in saying
that it was his present intention to proceed with his bill. Ile
would, however, move that the second reading be postponed
till Monday, in order to give hon. members, whose constituents
felt an anxiety on the subjeCt, an opportunity of consulting
them. If he thought that his bill could not. be passed this ses-
sion, he would withdraw it; but be knew that •it was the wish
of a great number of persons in the house and out of it, that
this bill should pass. One part of this bill was much misunder-
stood, and he had been asked by some friends whether it was
his intention to provide, in effect, that tolls on railroads should
hereafter be altogether abolished. Now, the word " abolition"
occurred in the bill, but it was by no means necessary, and he
had not the slightest objection to strike, out the word. It was
certainly not his intention that persons who engaged in these
great public undertakings should not be remunerated; it was
the duty of the house to encourage persons who engaged in
works of this kind, and his measure would not have the effect of
discouraging them; if it had, he would be very reluctant to
'proceed with it; but he was very sure it would, have a contrary•
effect, and he was equally sure that no persons ought to feel
more interested in the bill than the proprietors of railroads
themselves. He concluded by moving that the bill be post-
poned till •Monday._
The bill was understood to be deferred.
Lord J. RUSSELL believed the hon. gentleman who had
charge of the Poole corporation bill wits anxious to bring it on
to-night, and as far as he was concerned he did not object to
the hon. gentleman bringing it on at five o'clock.
Sir G. CLERK believed there were no fewer than six bills
before the house most material to the people of Scotland. He
had waited patiently during the whole of the session for some
opportunity of discussing those bills. The first was of very
great importance, relating to the commerce of Scotland—
namely, the bankruptcy estates (Scotland) bill, which had been
brought in by the Lord Advocate on the 25th of February, and
from that day tothis there had not been an opportunity afforded
of diseussing a single provision of the bill.
Lord J. fussEt,t, admitted their right of precedence, by pre
vious arrangement.

JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
Mr. FOSTER presented a petition from the directors of a joint-
stock bank in Walsall, praying that the inquiry ordered to be
made into joint-stock banks might be extended to private banks.
He differed from the petitioners. For his own part he con-
ceived that joint-stock banks, existing' under the provisions of
an act of parliament, and enjoying certain privileges therefrom,
were more properly the subject of a legislative enactment than
private banks, which carried on their business independent of
an act of parliament. • lie was informed by several most re-
spectable private bankers, that if government would grant them
the same privileges that were granted to joint-stock banks, they
would willingly disclose everything connected with their busi-
ness.
Lord SANDON presented a petition from certain bakers of
Liverpool, praying to be allowed to bake ship bread and biscuit
from ground bonded corn, for outward-bound vessels. •
Sir C. B. VERE asked when the report of the poor law com-
missioners for Ireland was likely to be ready ?
Lord J. RUSSELL answered that all he knew on the subject
was, that it was " in a state of preparation."
The Loan ADVOCATE deferred till next session the bank-
rupts (Scotland) bill; after which, on the learned lord's mo-
tion, the house went into committee on the sessions court (Scot-
land) bill. That bill occupied a good deal of time, as did the
committee on the small debts (Scotland) bill.
The house went into committee on the Poole corporation bill.
The first' clause was discussed at considerable length. The
committee divided on it. The numbers were—ayes, 98; noes,
64—majority, 34.—The house then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAI.
FOREIGN-WOOL.
Mr. P. THOMSON stated, in answer to a question from Mr.
Heathcote,t hat the French government had reduced the duty on
English wool imported into France.
EMIGRATION TO AUSTRALIA.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON asked the Under-Secretary of the Colo-
nies whether the committee for the promotion of female emigra-
tion to Australia had been acting under the sanction of govern-
ment ? That committee had sent out twelve vessels, containing
about 1500 single females, all of which had safely arrived. The
last two, containing 600 females, had reached their destination
without the occurrence of a single death. He was, therefore,
desirous of knowing whether the government were satisfied with
the proceedings of this committee, or whether the colonial go.-
vernment of Australia had reported to the home government
their approbation of the proceedings of the said committee in
that colony. He would be glad if the hon. baronet would ex-
plain the exact natnre of their proceedings.
Sir G. GREY said he had no difficulty in stating that the com-
mittee to which the hon. gentleman had adverted, and of which
he was an active member, had rendered most efficient assistance
in promoting the objects of female emigration to Australia. The
hon. member for Berkshire had alluded, the other evening, to a
placard which he (Sir G. Grey) had not then seen, but which
he had since learned had emanated from that committee. He
then stated it was a voluntary committee of gentlemen, who gave
their time gratuitously for the promotion of a laudable and
useful object; and he bad now to say, in addition, that that
committee had acted under regulations which were sanctioned
by government—regulations which he believed had been made
after much deliberation, and with a view to render their object
as efficient as possible. With regard to the approbation of the
colonial government, he had only to refer the hon. gentleman
to the paper containing a report of the arrival of the ships, and
the location of the emigrants after their arrival.

ESTABLISHED CHURCH BILL.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the house go info committee
on the established church bill, in a long speech.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON moved, as an amendment, that an ad-
dress be presented to his Majesty for the appointment of a com-
mission to consider and report on the expediency of abolishing
the existing system of translation of Bishops.
Mr. EWART, in seconding the amendment, said, that one of
the reasons which led him to oppose the system of translations
was, that it went to encourage a worldly ambition, which he re-
garded as most fatal to the true interests of religion and to
genuine piety—an ambition which did not exist in the purer
ages, of the church. It had been stated to the house that the
noble lord proposed to make the income of the bishops vary from
£4,000 to £B,OOO, and thus did he establish a regular ladder for
their ambition—providing for the branches of the great aristo-
cracy, and neglecting the interests of the poorer clergy, that
working class who ought to be the more immediate object of at-
tention with the legislature. The measure was one which he
thought calculated to shake all confidence that the laity might
be disposed to place in the church establishment, for it was not
a measure of real reform—it was not one which would satisfy
the people—no, nor even the church, for the church itself was
unanimous in desiring to see au end put to the practice of
translation. A. real reform would begin with the democracy of
the church, and would assimilate it to the church of Scotland,
where the clergy lived amongst the people, and for the people.
As it was not what the exigency of the case required, he hoped
the proposed bill might be thrown. out.
Sir R. PEEL said he should support the measure of the noble
lord, not because the commissioners upon whose report that
measure was founded had been appointed while he was in office.
but because he approved in the main of the principle of the bill.
It was quite true that the commissioners on some points in their
report appeared to have differed, and to have been so nearly di-
vided as that the numbers were as six to seven, yet he was en-
titled to state that when they were appointed, on the issuing of
the commission, they did not differ from each other iu politics,
but circumstances had since. changed, and with that change of
circumstances a division took place between them. There was,
however, one point upon which they were perfectly unanimous,
and to which allusion had beep already made, These commis-
sioners, then, however, differing from cads other in politics, had
certainly recommended a measure, the object of which was to
conciliate the affections of the people, and to extend the sphere
of that influence which the church exercised—they had, in short,
recommended that which every layman, wishing well to our
church and sincerely attached to its true interests, would most
earnestly desire to see realized. One of the best proofs that the
favourable opinion which that report drew forth was well
founded, might be.derived from the very earliest proceedings of
the commission. What was their first act ? Every bishop be-
longing to the commission resigned at once all the patronage
that he possessed, to whatever extent that patronage could be
made available for the purposes of any measure of reform that
might be founded on their report. Some hon. members had
thought proper to contend that the proposed measure of the
noble lord would have the effect of making better and more am-
ine provision for what they called the aristocracy of the church
than the democracy. Now, he requested for a moment that at-
tention might be directed to the manner in which the present
state of inequality operated, and even the way in which the pre-
sent mode of exercising church patronage was exercised. He
would take the five first names in the Red Book—the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York, the Bishops of
London, Durham, and Winchester, and he would beg to inquire
if those most rev. and right rev. prelates appeared to have been
advanced to their high dignities and emoluments from any consi-
derations connected with the feelings or the influence of aristo-
cracy. Was it not a matte; of the most perfect notoriety, familiar
to every man who new anything of the church, that they rose by
reason of their learning, their virtues, and their other eminent
qualifications ? and sureV, with facts such as these before the
house, they could not for a moment doubt that the democracy
of the church would feel their interests had been fully considered
and as effectually promoted by the translation of• those dis-
tinguished persons to the highest situations in the church as if
all the church livings were brought to the one uniform staudard
of £4OO or £5OO a-year. He admitted that the measure•of the
noble lord, of which he professed himself a supporter, was one
which would still leave apparent inequalities in the church, dif-
ferences in the actual amount of the emoluments received; but
he felt satisfied that no man having the most moderate acquain-
tance with the affairs of the church could entertain a rational
doubt that an exact and uniform scale of emolument would lead
of necessity to substantial inequality, owing to the different cir-
cumstances affecting the severalhishops in the respective sees.
He was, then, fully persuaded that the house would agree with
him in thinking that an income 01E4000 or £5OOO could not be
fixed for all the sees. The only mode of making the emoluments
really equal would he, to accommodate them to the varying cir-
cumstances of each individual see. But the inequality of which
he spoke could he defended upon anotherground—namely, that
our various civil establishments were marked by similar inequali-
ties. He had not overlooked the circumstance that some hon.
members at the other side of the house objected to the present
measure, as calculated to excite ambition in the members of the
episcopal bench. The real question, however, we's this—were
hon. members prepared to separate the higher classes of the