The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-05-19 00:00:00

imprrial Varlianunt.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAY.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the Rev.
R. Nl`Ghee, Dublin, praying the house not to sanction
the introduction of papal bulls into this country.
With reference to the Religious Opinions Relief Bill,
the Btsecr. of EXETER proposed that two questions
should be submitted for the consideration of the Judges—
first, whether independently of the acts of the first and
fifth of Elizabeth it was a punishable offence to deny the
Queen's supremacy, or to maintain the jurisdiction of the
Pope in these realms; and secondly, whether independ-
ently of the first named act it was an offence to put in
execution any balls emanating from the See of Rome?

The Lord CHANCELLOR (rid not think it necessary to
take the course pursued. There was a clear distinction
between ecclesiastical and spiritual, and civil and tempo-
ral authority, and the oath administered to Roman Catho-
lics had been altered so as clearly to recognise her Majesty
as the supreme head in the latter respects. _ _

Lord BROUGHAM quite concurred with his noble and
learned friend's view of the case.
After some observations from Lords DENMAN and
CAMPBELL, affirming the supremacy of the Sovereign
from time immemorial,
__

Lord BEAUMONT explained to the House the difference
between dogmas of faith and matters of discipline, and de-
axied most explicitly that the Roman Catholic Church at
the present day held that the Pope had power to depose
Princes or absolve subjects from their allegiance.
The Bishop of EXETER again solemnly warned the
House of the dangerous breach they were about to make
in the constitution of the empire, but ended by withdraw-

ing his motion

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY

On the 'notion for the third reading of the Corn Bill,

The Marquis of GRANBY, after an animated speech in
;opposition to the bill, moved that it be read a third time
that day six months.
Mr. M. GASKELL seconded the amendment.
After some discussion, in which Mr. Sheridan, Mr.
Plover, and Sir 3. Easthope took part.
Mr. MILES argued that it was impossible, comparing
the taxation of this country with that of others, that we
could enter into competition with either Russia or the
United States in the production of grain, and he was
therefore confident that the liouse of Lords would never
pass the bill then under the consideration of the house.
J. GRAHAM said ,he had no doubt that the bill
ssed by a decided majority in the House of
luestion had upon all hands been narrowed
o whether the removal of the protection
t be oreiudicial to the tillers of the soil.

would be p,
Lords. Thl

and if it should be apparent that the existing corn-law
would be injurious to the labourers, he, for one, would
notadvotwe it, but he was satisfied

his conscience, that

be had never advocated the r

distress in Ireland ; for
had only precipitated t

which was is

CAYLEY contended, in a very an

umentative speech

n of protection must lie equally injurio

rmer and t

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TuEsnA
Letate on the third

ing of the Corn Bill was
st it, and Mr. G. Palmer,

r. New
ill, M

Captain Poll)
Wakh, Mr. I
Mr. Sevaler,

Scott, Lord Brook

Captain Vyse, and
Mr. S. Crawford

spoke on the same

your of the measure, when the

-WEDNESDAY