The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-07-19 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS.-FRIDAY

The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the second reading of the
bill for the better protection of the Queen's person.
Lord MELBOURNE supported the bill, and observed that
the life of her Majesty was, he believed, more exposed than
that of any other person whatever. And it was only right,
therefore, that it should be surrounded with every possible
protection.
Lord BROUGHAM, in supporting the bill, said that the state
of public feeling, if any thing had happened to her Majesty,
might be judged of by the grief which now pervaded France,
in consequence of a recent melancholy accident in that
country.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said he felt confident he was
only expressing the deep feeling of the house, when he de-
clared his sympathy with those who mourned the fate of the
prince alluded to.

- The bill was read a second time, and was subsequently
passed through its remaining stages.
The New South Wales bill was read a second time.

The mines and collieries ill was committed;;c.)jOrma, in
order to insert some amendments. After which it was or-
dered to be printed, and re-committed on Tuesday next.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY.
In reply to a question from Mr. LABOUCHERE, who com-
plained of the high duty imposed on the export of cement
stone, by which many persons on the eastern coast of Eng-
land would be thrown out of employment,
Mr. GLADSTONE said that no remonstrance had been
made against the duty, although it was known for months
before the act passed. It was supposed that this species of
stone was nearly exhausted, and therefore it was that the
duty was imposed ; but since then it was discovered that the
supposition was unfounded. In consequence of the burping
of Hamburg there was a great demand for the cement stone,
and government intended to take off the duty in a bill which
he was about to bring in to rectify certain errors which had
crept into the engrossed copy of the customs duties act. _

‘,
The house then resolved itself into a committee of the
whole house, and a resolution was agreed to on which to
found a bill for the amendment of the customs duties act.
The house then resumed, the resolution was reported, and
leave was given to bring in the bill.
In reply to a question from Mr. M. PHILIPS,
Mr. GLADSTONE stated that he was not aware that any
large supplies of corn could be expected from Malta, but all
corn from that island would pay the same rate of duty as fo-
reign corn.

Mr. M. GIBSON postponed his motion relative to the dis-
tress of the country, owing to the absence of Sir R. Peel.

The house theu went into committee of supply.
On the vote of £39,200 for secret service money,

.r •
Mr. WILLIAMS objected to the payment of home secret
service money, as there was a general impression that much
of it was devoted to electioneering purposes. He moved as
an amendment a reduction of the grant by the sum of
£20,000.

On a division the amendment was negatived by a majority
of 117 to 13.

On the vote of £11,713 for the care and arrangement of
the public records, _

Mr. H. HINDE spoke of the condition of the various pub-
lications undertaken by the late record commission.
Sir J. GRAHAM was of opinion that such works as were
nearly fin;slied should be completed, but not to proceed with
any others, as the expense was very great.
The vote 0fX30,000 for education led to some discussion,
in the course of which Messrs. Ewart, Brotherton, and
Bowring, expressed their regret that the sum was not consi-
derably larger.
Mr. M. GIBSON complained of the narrow and sectarian
mode in which education was given to the people.
Mr. CHILDERS maintained that of all the northern nations
of Europe, this country was the most deficient in the means
proper national education.
Sir J. GDAHAM, in reply to a question, said that the go-
vernment had it under consideration whether or not they
should submit to parliament a specific vote in aid of the
classes upon Mr. Hullah's system.
Mr. HUME censured the monopolising spirit which he con-
tended the church displayed, by claiming the exclusive di-
rection of national education.
After some observations from Mr.
PROTHEROE,
and Mr.
1 HARDY,
Sir R. H. Isoi is expressed disapprobation of the speech
of the President Of the. Council on this subject in the other
house
ed
ocfe ceaseparliament,and hoped his eonduct would be
estrgi:dcdis-
owned by vt7eivirlenicnihteo,nt. The government, he trusted,
principles which it had formerly op-
posed—principles hriisghotis)i nair,iidn
'
out, prove dduties would,of
the
ifh e carried
of the system adopted
estab-
lished church.
Sir J. GRAB", coincidedw most warmly in the sentiments
frankly and manfullthteoircarrly'
expressed by Lord
The
oguotv;erannmdehnet
hapolp)reodvetod
brynclitre.predecessors, and were pre-
paredbe aided, should additionaYl
lature. He must observe, i funds
hon. baronet, that it was calenulrat't be required, by the legis-
ference to the speech of the
the members of a governs eft to
'Ow
dissension amongst
support.
After some further discussion thewyliteehwaisleagprereodfetsose.d to
On the vote for the sum to defray
visiting barristers, the exPenses of the re-
Sir J. GRAHAM said it was his intention to
pledge he had given, by bringing in a Registrationreiem
lilt the
be-
fore the close of the session, and that bill would contain a
clause for the establishment of an appellative jurisdiction.
On the vote for the colony of New Zealand,
Mr. V. SmlTit objected to the portion of the vote which

wont to establish bishopric in that colony, on tho principle I
that if it was necessary to do so it should be done by a
regular proposition to parliament, and not by a mere vote in
supply. The hon. member quoted from a former declaration
made by Lord Stanley, in which he said he had the strongest
objection to placing the church on the estimates—the very
thing which, he contended, he was doing by this vote. When
a similar measure was proposed by Lord J. Russell, he (Mr.
V. Smith) opposed it, and he was, therefore, consistent in
now objecting to it, when proposed by the present govern-
ment.
Lord STANLEY said that this appointment of a bishop in
New Zealand, and the vote proposed, were merely keeping
the faith pledged by the late government. He had strong
objections to placing the maintenance of the church upon
the estimates, but the peculiar circumstances of the case left
him no alternative but to follow up what had been done by
his predecessor.
Mr. HUME could not see that at all. If Lord John Rus-
sell made a promise, let Lord John Russell pay the money.
(A laugh.) There was no compulsion on the noble lord
(Stanley) to do so. He moved, therefore, a reduction of
the vote by the amount of the bishop's allowance. Should
he be defeated, lie would move that Lord John Russell be
called upon to pay the money. (A laugh.)
After some discussion, the amendment was negatived by
a majority of 131 to 25.
Mr. HUME then gave notice that, when the house resumed,
he would move in committee of ways and means to see how
the late government could be made to pay the money. (A
laugh.)
On the vote for the national system of education in Ire-
land a discussion arose as to the propriety of the mode of
education pursued, Mr. Plumptre, Mr. A. Campbell, and
other hon. members complaining of it, because of the mutila-
tion of the Scriptures, extracts from which only were placed
in the hands of the children.
Lord ELIOT and other hon. members defended the system,
and said ihat considering the difference of the Catholic and
Protestant population of Ireland in point of numbers, and
the comparative wealth of the latter, the average number at-
tending the schools was fully in proportion to the number of
Catholics.
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON entreated the government to re-
consider the question in any future grant, and defended the
Kildare-street Society, which had been referred to in the course
of the discussion by Lord Eliot, with whom he could not
agree either in his praise of the national system or his dis-
approbation of the Kildare-street Society. The hon. and
learnd gentleman very warmly opposed the whole principle
upon which the government were proceeding upon this ques-
tion of national education.
Mr. LABOUCRERE supported the vote, and expressed his
satisfaction at the sentiments which had been expressed by
Lord Eliot.
Lord STANLEY, in supporting the vote, said that the
strenuous opposition of Mr. Sergeant Jackson gave him no
surprise when he recollected how long he had been connected
with the Kildare-street Society, which he naturally felt him-
self called upon to defend. The noble lord then contended
that the national system, though by no means perfect, yet
had the effect of softening the asperities of religious differ-
ences and of giving to the people of Ireland an improved kind
of education.
After a prolonged and occasionally angry discussion, which
lasted until past two o'clock in the morning,
Mr. WARD and Mr. M. GIBSON forced a division, with a
view to show how small was the minority opposed to the vote.
Lord STANLEY commented on the course pursued by the
two hon. members, who would be forced to vote against their
own opinions, by declaring that the noes had it."
Mr. WARD replied that they would be the tellers.
A division then took place, and the result was, that Mr.
Ward was defeated in his object, for the vote was carried by
a majority of 94 to none, the opponents of the vote declining
to fall into the trap laid for them.
Mr. PLUMPTRE said he voted for the vote, because he
would not be driven to a division against it by the hon. mem-
ber. He would vote against it when the report was brought
up.
After some further observations the house resumed, and
soon after adjourned.