The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-08-22 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS-WEDNESDAY.

On the motion of Sir J. GRAHAM the house went into
committee on the Episcopal Functions Bill, which pro-
vides for the performance of the episcopal functions in any
diocese, when the bishop, from bodily or mental infirmity,
is rendered incapable of attending to his duties.
On clause 7 being proposed, Lord CLIVE moved its
omission. He thought the power of issue or nominating
the commission, in case of either of the archbishops,
should be given to the archbishop of the other province,
instead of to the Lord Chancellor. The power, if taken
from the Church, was likely to be used for political pur-
poses.
Dr. Nictrou. supported the clause, and held that there
were -.llfficient checks against abuse. The patronage pro-
perly belonged to the crown.
Lord CLIVE said, his objection was not to the composi-
tion of the commission, but that the power of appointing
and nominating it was given to other than ecclesiastical
authority. He must, therefore, divide against the clause.
The committee then divided, and the numbers were—
For the clause 5l
Against it 4
Majority
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill.
Mr. HAWES objected to making the bishop a member
of the Court of Appeal in temporal matters. It was most
undesirable to mix up judicial with ecclesiastical functions.
Sir J. GRAHAM contended most strenuously for th,.
supremacy of the crown over all ecclesiastical matters.
In conformity with the principle of the Church Discipline
Act, although it was not desirable to enlarge the power of
the bishops in matters temporal, yet in matters spiritual—
and spiritual matters were here involved—there was not
only no objection, but it was highly proper that they
should have jurisdiction as a Court of Appeal in the last
resort.

The clause was agreed to, as were the remaining clauses.
A discussion ensued on the question that the house
should resolve itself into committee on the Chelsea Pen-
sioners Bill. Ultimately it went into committee, and a
debate took place as to the period for which it was to con-
tinue in operation, the government proposing it as a per-
manent measure, while Mr. Hume and other hon. members
contended that its duration should be limited to three or
five years. On a division, the proposal for limiting the
operation of the bill to five years was negatived by a ma-
jority of 76 to 33. A second proposition to limit its du-
ration to five years and six months was also rejected by a
majority of 82 to M.
Mr. HOME declared that he would give no further op-
position to the bill, though his opinion respecting it re-
tnained unchanged.
In reply to a question from Mr. Ewart, Sir J. GRAHAM
said, that though the government had no present plan of
education, yet they would turn their attent►on to the sub-
ject during the recess.
Mr. CHRISTIE moved the committee on the Defama-

tion and Libel Bill, stating, at some length, its provisions
to the house.

The ATTORNEY- GEN ERAL said, that the Bill contained
provisions to which he was opposed, because they appeared
to him to be carrying them back to the barbarous severi.
ties of the old law before it was ameliorated by public
opinion. He was, however, willing to adopt anything in
the bill which was an improvement in the existing law,
especially that permitting the plea of truth in cases of
criminal information.
The various clauses were, after discussion, agreed to,
and the house soon after adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS—THURSDAY.
The royal assent was given, by commission, to several
bills, including the Liverpool Docks arid Harbour Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a number of petitions on
various subjects. The noble and learned lord said that
15,800 names had been sent to him, many of them most
respectable ; they had been subscribed to a petition on
some subject or other in twenty-four hours in the town of
Liverpool ; but unluckily for the parties they had forgotten
to send the petition. (A laugh.)
Earl STANHOPE said it was a very common thing to
remove the heading of a petition while it was being signed.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE, Earls FORTESCIJE and
GLENGALL, and Lords MONTEAGLE and CAMPBELL,
also again delivered their opinions on the remedies neces-
sary for the present state of Ireland, after which the bill
passed through committee.

- The Foreign Jurisdiction Bill also passed through com-
mittee.

Several bills on the table were forwarded a stage, and
he hJuse adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY.

A number of bills were advanced a stage. The Law of
Evidence Bill gave rise to some discussion.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said one of the provisions
of the bill was to render persons not now allowed to give
evidence to be competent witnesses on any trial. There
was a strange anomaly in the present law of evidence.
He would natice one, for instance, of a man who was in
Newgate, or any other gaol, suffering imprisonment for
an offence against the law ; he could not give evidence
to-day on any trial, but if his imprisonment expired to-
morrow he would be a competent witness. (Hear, hear.)
Now it was the crime that affected the character of the
man and not the punishment; consequently a person, if
convicted of an offence, ought for ever to be rendered in-
competent, or not only so during the period of his impri-
sonment. A man in prison to-day could not give evi-
dence, his imprisonment might expire to-morrow, and he
was at once a competent witness—could there be a greater
absurdity ? (Hear, hear, hear.) The same absurdity
existed as regarded preventing parties interested in a suit
from giving evidence.
Sir J. EASTEIOPE presented a petition from an indivi-
dual named Campbell, against the pension granted to the
daughter of the Duke of Cambridge. The petitioner sta-
ted that he used the words " honourable house " from
courtesy, but not of his own conviction. (Hear.)
Mr. WARD moved for a return of the actual amount
of the revenue of the Protestant Church in Ireland at the
present time.
Ordered.

Mr. CHRISTIE gave notice that to-morrow he should
ask the right hon. Bart. the Home Secretary, whether
next session the government intended to bring forward any
measure for the suppression of duelling, or to advise her
Majesty to direct any steps to be taken on the subject.
(Hear.) . . . . .

Captain POLHILL gave notice that early next session be
should move for the appointment of a select committee to
consider the best mode of regulating the price of bread
in the metropolis.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM and Sir ROBT. PEEL did not think
any legislation on the subject would be beneficial to the
public, or afford any check on the trade. The most ef-
fectual mode would be not to deal with those bakers who
charged too high a price—that would be the means of
putting an effectual check to a practice of taking an ad-
vantage of any temporary opportunity to raise the prices.
(Hear.)
Mr. WYSE postponed his motion on the subject of edu-
cation until next session.
Adjourned.