The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-07-30 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS, FRIDAY, JULY 26.

The Earl of FALMOUTH presented a petition from Penzance
against the new Beer Act.
CHURCH TEMPORALITIES (IRELAND) BILL.
Earl GREY rose and observed that he was prepared to state
to their lordships the further alterations which, from what
passed last night, it might be expected he should make in the
clause under consideration. But before he proceeded to do so,
he would not attempt to conceal the disappointment and regret
he had felt at the decision to which their lordships had arrived
on that occasion. He could not help thinking, when he consi-
dered the circumstances under which that decision had been
come to, and the appearances attending it, that the result had
placed His Majesty's ministers in a situation of great embarrass-
ment. It was hardly necessary for him to say that after that
adverse decision it was necessary for His Majesty's ministers
to take time to consider in what manner it was right to proceed.
The amendment of the most rev. prelate was not perhaps of
great importance in itself; its effect, as he understood it, was
just this—that in the first instance the commissioners were to
apply the funds accruing from the suspension of benefices to the
building of churches in such benefices; and in the second place,
that if it did not appear necessary to employ those funds in that
way, they might transfer them over to the general fund, for the
purpose of applying them to the purposes specified in the pro-
visions of the act. Such he understood to be the meaning of
the amendment which had been carried last night, and he cer-
tainly did not know, were it not fur the circumstances under
which it had been passed, that he should have entertained any
great objection to it; for, in point of fact, it made no material
alteration in the discretionary powers of the commissioners.
Upon second consideration, however, it did appear to him that
the effect of the amendment would be far from an improvement
to the bill -tho Ugh certainly he did not deem it such an aitera-
ation, affecting the general efficacy of the measure, as would
justify him in abandoning the duty he had imposed upon him-
self of conducting it through •the house. He regretted the al-
teration ; and he certainly reserved to himself the right of pro-
posingi such further amendments as would be calculated to mo-
dify t ; but certainly, as the clause at present stood, he did
think he was bound to go on, and not to relinquish the conduct
of that great and important measure, which he believed essen-
tial to the connexion of the two kingdoms, the safety of the
people and church of Ireland, and the general interests of the
country at large. (Hear.) At the same time he would not
disguise from their lordships that he did labour under deep
sensations of difficulty and embarrassment in consequence of
the vote which had been come to last night, and he certainly
felt that if any further alterations of the same nature should be
made, it would be for him then to consider how far it would be
possible for him, consistently with his duty to his sovereign and
his country, to continue the conduct of the measure. But as
he did not consider the adverse vote of last night very material
in itself, he was prepared then to proceed with the further con-
sideration of the clause in committee, and would propose such
further alterations in it as seemed consequent on what had
passed last night. He then had taken occasion to.declare that
it was his earnest wish and endeavour, as far as he possibly
could, consistently with his duty (which was paramount to every
consideration,) in carrying into full force the general principles
of the bill, to make every concession in his power. (Hear.)
After haying conceded ail the material points of objection that
applied to the particular clause under consideration, it was, he
must confess, a cause of deep mortification and regret to him
that the amendment was pressed. Flaying stated thus much,
he would at once proceed to the further consideration of the
clause, and to the objections which had been urged by the most
rev. prelate against it. These objections resolved themselves
into two points, which, if they had affected materially the effi-
cacy of the clause, he (Earl Grey) would state most distinctly
and emphatically that there would be at once an end to his mo-
tive for proceeding further with the measure. (Hear, hear.)
The first point was, that power should be given to the commis-
sioners to give salaries not only to the incumbent and officiating
ministers, but also to the curate of the adjoining parish ; and
the second, that there should be some saving of the rights of
the bishops. Now, after giving the bishops au absolute control
in the decision,—a step which appeared to him subject to great
embarrassment,—his grace was leased to assent to the propo-
sition which he (Earl Grey) made to obviate the difficulty, ob-
serving at the same time that in his (the Archbishop of Canter-
bury's) opinion it was an improvement. With a view then to
further these two points, which were the object of the most rev.
prelate's opposition, he (Earl Grey) would propose two amend-
ments. The first would be to give the power to the commis-
sioners not only of granting salaries to the incumbent and
officiating minister, but also to provide for the appointment and
payment 6f a curate or other minister to perform the occasional
duties of the parish. The second amendment he had to propose
would be to admit the archbishop or bishop of the diocess in
which a suspended living was situated to a seat in the board of
commissioners, pro hoc rice, as he had before stated. Ile con-
ceived that these amendments would remove all manner of
objection to the clause. Having stated this much, he did not
know that he need do more than move that the amendments be
added to the clause.
, The noble earl then moved amendments to the effect he had
stated. They were agreed to without opposition.
The remaining clauses, together with the preamble and sche-
dules of the bill, having been agreed to, the house resumed, and
the report was ordered to be received on Monday.
The house then adjourned.
HOUSE OF' COMMONS, FRIDAY, JULY 26.

The gallery was opened at a quarter past Twelve o'clock.

BRITISH POSSESSIONS BILL.

The SPEAKER then moved that the order of the day for going
into committee on the above bill should be read.

Mr. P. THOMPSON was anxious, before the house resolved
itself into committee, to make a proposal to consolidate the law
as it at present stood. The effect of this proposal would be,
that without making any alteration in the law, several acts of
Parliament would be brought into one. He pledged himself to
no alteration, but merely a consolidation of the 9 bills alluded
to. If this principle should be adopted by the house, he was
then prepared to proceed with them; but if otherwise, it was
evident it was utterly impossible to carry them throligh; and he
thought, under such circumstances, he should best consult the
convenience of the house by withdrawing them altogether.
(Hear, hear.) On the understanding, therefore, that the 9
bills were simply matters of consolidation, he hoped the house
would permit them to pass through the committee pro forma.
After a short conversation, the house went into committee
seriatim on the British Possessions Bill, the Registly of Vessels
Bill, the Customs Duties Bill, the Customs Management Bill,
the Customs Bounties Bill, the Customs Regulations Bill, and
the Isle of Man Trade Bill.

Lord LOWTHER asked the right hon. gentleman whether it
was intended by the government to permit the exemption from
the payment of duty on the importation of foreign timber into
the Isle of Man to exist.

Mr. P. THOMSON said that not only the system of duties on
timber imported into that island, but also other duties, would
undergo a revision. The duty on timber would be altered in
the earliest possible period, but would certainly not be delayed
beyond the next year. (Cheers.)
The bills then went severally through the committee, and the
reports were ordered to be received on Monday next.
At three o'clock the Speaker quitted the chair.

The house resumed at five o'clock.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.
Mr. O'CONNELL moved, that on Monday next the proprietors
and publisher of The Times should be brought to the bar of the

house, to answer for a breach of privilege for publishing "the
debates of that house. The learned gentleman made a direct
personal charge against one reporter of this paper for having
twice reported. nun " designedly false."
Mr. HUME io,e to second the motion, not for the reasons
stated by the hon. and learned gentleman who proposed it, but
in order that the question, in what way the proceedings of that
house should be in future reported, might be fairly settled.
Mr. H. CURTEIS put it to the lion. member for Dublin if he
could be serious in that part of his motion which related to
Mrs. Brodie. Mrs. Brodie was a most amiable and estimable
lady, the widow of a clergyman, and deservedly beloved and
respected by all who knew her. She at least could have
nothing to do with reporting or not reporting the hon. member
for Dublin (Loud cries of hear.); and he requested to know,
therefore, if the hon. member meant to persist in this part of
his motion,—for if he (Mr. O'Connell) dud, he (Mr. Curteis)
was quite sure that no one with feelings of justice—not to say
of gallantry--could vote with him. (Loud assenting cheers
from all parts of the house.)
Mr. O'CONNELL consented to dispense with the lady's at-
tendance.

When the motion was put, two or three members expressed
their dissent to it, but the Speaker pronounced it to be carried.

WARWICK ELECTION.

In answer to a question,
Lord ALTIWRP said that the report of the committee appointed
to inquire into the transactions which took place at the War-
wick election did certainly contain charges of a serious nature
as affecting the privileges of that house.; but before he stated
what course the government had pursued upon the subject, he
was anxious to correct a misapprehension which existed in the
public mind with respect to the conduct pursued by government
in regard to lords-lieutenant of counties. It was knoll n that
government had frequently been accused of allowing noblemen
and gentlemen to remain in the situation of lords-lieutenant of
counties whose political opinions and conduct differed materially
from their own. As far as his recollection went, the office of a
lord-lieutenant of a county had never been considered as a po-
litical office, and persons in that situation were not appointed
solely in reference to their political opinions, nor removed ge-
nerally in consequence of their political conduct. He knew
there were exceptions to this rule. Two instances had occurred
in his time, and one or two before, of lords-lieutenant having
been removed for their political conduct; but he appealed to
those with whom he had always acted, whether they did not
express their strongest disapprobation of the course which
the government pursued in those cases ? (Hear, hear, hear.)
Having taken this opportunity of stating his views on this ques-
tion, namely, that noblemen and gentlemen filling the office of
lords-lieutenant should not be removed from their situation in
consequence of their political opinions, he would now advert to
the case to which the attention of the house had been particu-
larly called. He admitted that that case was a very different
one from the case of a lord-lieutenant merely differing from the
government in political opinions. (Loud elks of "hear.")
Here it was not a question of difference of political opinions,
but. of a lord-liedtenant interfering, as it was alleged, with the
privileges of that house. (Hear, hear.) He certainly (was
ready to admit that this was a most serious charge, but inas-
much as it affected severely the character of the noble lord in
question, so much more necessary was it to give that noble lord
an opportunity of explaining his conduct. This was the course
which his Majesty's ministers had determined to pursue, and a
letter either had been, or would immediately be, written to the
Earl of Warwick, stating what had been reported against him,
and calling on him for an explanation, in order that the govern-
ment might ascertain whether it was necessary or desirable to
take any further steps in the matter. (Cheers.)

AST INDIA BILL.

Mr. C. FERGUSSON said he rose to present a petition from the
East India Company relative to certain parts of this bill. The
petition complained of the change proposed to be made in the
constitution of the local government of the country, and ex-
pressed an apprehension that its tendency was to place a preju-
dicial power and influence in the hands of the Governor-General
of India. The petitioners also objected to that part of the bill
which related to the ecclesiastical establishment in India, and
particularly to the appointment of twu bishops, and stated that
the result of these alterations would be to place a tax on the
natives of 50,000 rupees a year.
The petition having been read and placed upon the table,
Mr. C. FERGUSSON moved that the East India Company be
heard by counsel against the bill.
Mr. rIUME seconded the motion.

For the motion 3O
Against it
Majority -70
On returning to the gallery we found Mr. Wilks addressing
the house on the practice of infanticide in India.
After a few words from Mr. C. Grant, which were not heard,
Mr. WyNN said he doubted whether the local legislatures
could with safety interfere for the purpose of preventing local
infanticide. The extinction of that cruel custom must depend
on the proirress of knowledge and the spread of civilization.
Mr. C. GRANT then moved the third reading of the bill, which
after some discussion was read a third time and passed.

SLAVERY BILL.

Mr. STANLEY hoped that as there were not many petitions
before the house, there would be no objection to taking this bill
at twelve o'clock on Monday next.
The request was understood to have been acceded to.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned at half-post two o'clock.