The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-07-31 00:00:00

imperial parliament,

HOUSE OF LORDS.-
MESSAGE PROM THE COMMONS
Mr. Bernal and others brought up the Austrian treaty bill,
the marriage act amendment bill, the soap duties bill, the
affirmation bill, and other bills, which were severally read a
first time. The canal police bill was read a second time and

MONDAY

passed

MR. .IBEL HEY WOOD

The Bishop of EXETER, seeing the Secretary-of State for
the Home Department in his place, gave notice that he
would, on Monday next (as he believed the noble marquis
would be absent the greater part of the week), present a
petition from the clergy and others of Manchester, praying
their lordships to inquire into the facts relating to the pro-
secution of Abel Heywood, for publishing a blasphemous
libel ; and the circumstances under which the government
thought fit to forego passing any sentence.

ECCESIASTICAL DUTIES AND REVENUES BILL

Lord MELBOURNIZ, on moving the second reading of this
bill, would confine himself entirely to its general principle,
which was this, whether their lordships would consent to
some reduction of the present cathedral establishments of the
country, and to an application of the fund which would be
derived from that reduction to the supplying of a remedy to
the state of unhappy spiritual destitution which, unquestion-
ably, from various causes, prevailed through a great part of
this country. One error ran through the speeches of both
the learned counsel who had addressed their lordships,
namely, that they were called on to suppress cathedrals,
whereas, they were only called on to make reductions which
would still leave them amply sufficient for all the purposes
for which they were instituted, and to apply the funds raised
by the present measure to meet that deficiency in the paro-
chial system which it was the first duty of the legislature to
take means to remedy. The noble lord then proceeded to
describe the origin of the ecclesiastical commission, and the
result of their labours. Their recommendations respecting
pluralities and sinecures had also been carried into effect,
and now their lordships were called on to carry out the re-
commendations contained in the second and fourth report.
He was informed by • the right hon. baronet (Sir Robert
Peel) who appointed the commission, that the commission
was appointed, not for the sake of a temporary popularity,
but from a sintere belief that it would be for the benefit of
the church, and from the conviction of the great destitution
in the great towns and manufacturing districts. On the part
of himself and colleagues, he had to make the same statement.
His lordship showed from the report the extent of the spiri-
tual destitution in the country, and observed that it was
hardly necessary for him to argue that the church ought to
set an example in making such an apportionment of the funds
at her disposal as would shew her readiness and her zeal to
emulate and assist them. The deans and chapters loosed on
the measure as a soil of imputation on them that they had
neglected their duty ; but while this strong feeling against
the bill existed on the part of the clergy, it at the same time
rendered them not the best judges of the matter in question.
He did not think that the church alone, and by herself, was
celebrated for her legislation. She had not been happy in
her efforts in that particular, and he, therefore, would not be
deterred from proceeding with the bill from the disappro-
bation of the clergy, even if it was as great and as extensive
as it was represented to be.

The Bishop of WINCHESTER contended, that the whole
weight of authority went directly against a measure of the
character of that now proposed. What right had the legis-
lature to deal with property given for certain specific pur-
poses—not by the state, but by individuals for ever ? He
admitted that the poor diocese of Exeter and the populous
diocese of Chester had claims on the church - but he
maintained that the state itself should be called upon
to take its part, and to do its duty in this matter. The right
reverend prelate in conclusion moved as an amendment, that
the bill be read that day three months.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY considered the bill to
be one of the greatest importance, both to the nation and
the church, but in quite a contrary sense to that entertained
by the right reverend prelate (the Bishop of Winchester.).
His belief was, that, if their lordships should unfortunately
determine to throw out this bill, the result would be more
or less disastrous to the church. It had been said that it
was the duty of the state to provide for the spiritual wants
of the people, Granted ; but the state had likewise a right
to say to the church, " Do something for yourselves towards
remedying the evils of spiritual destitution." That was the
language held by an illustrious duke twelve years ago, and
similar expressions were used by Earl Grey. With the latter
nobleman, he (the Archbishop of Canterbury) had held much
confidential conversation on the subject of the church, and
bad been told by him, " We can do nothing for the church,
if the church will do nothing for itself." Such likewise was
the opinion of Sir R. Peel. The prejudices that were in
many quarters entertained against the church would be
strengthened and increased by the cry that the church was
calling upon the country to do every thing, whilst she would
do nothing for herself. He had heard it said that the deans
and chapters were against the measure ; but he did not be-
lieve that the clergy, as a body, were generally averse to it.
Lord LYTTLETON could only look upon this as a wild and
baseless scheme of confiscation ; and he trembled, not for
the church, nor for those who were doing this wrong, but
for the age which could produce such a measure. (Cheers.)
The Earl of H ARROWEY supported, and the Earl of
DEvoN opposed the bill.
The Bishops of GLOUCESTER and LINCOLN defended, and
the Bishops of SALISBURY and ROCHESTER attacked the
measure ; after which the house divided, and the second
reading was carried by a majority of 99 to 48. Their lord-
ships then adjourned at half-past twelve o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY

Captain PECHSLL gave notice, that on Thursday he should
move for a return of the number of churches and chapels
built within the last ten years—at whose expense they were
built—how the funds were raised—and how the proceeds
arising from pew rents or otherwise were applied.

COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH FRANCE

Mr. LABOUCHERE, in answer to a question from Mr. B.
Wood, whether, if the commercial treaty with France should
be concluded during the recess, it would be acted on imme-
diately, said he need not inform the hon. gentleman and the
house that it was absolutely impossible that any treaty that
proposed lower duties could be carried into operation until
the alterations were sanctioned by a vote of the house. He
hoped that, at a very early period of the next session of par-
liament, he should be able to propose such a measure as
would be required to give effect to the treaty. The house
entered on the discussion of the report of the committee of
supply of the sth May last.
In answer to a question from Mr. HUME, whether the re-
port was true that a strong reinforcement of British troops
was to be sent to the Levant, which had a considerable effect
upon the public securities,
Lord PALMERSTON said " No."
Sir R. PEEL asked the noble lord whether the quadruple
treaty was still in force.

Lord PALMERSTON said, virtually the engagement was
over; but if the same state of things should arise, the spirit
of that treaty would require a recurrence to the same steps—
the treaty would, he conceived, be still in force, and the same
parties equally bound by it.