23 MAY 1835, Page 2

Mehateg anti Procerbingsi in Patliamrnt.


Lord STANLEY called the attention of the House of Commons, on Monday, to the conduct of Dr. Webber, the Vicar of Kirkham in Lan- cashire. Dr. Webber was formerly Chaplain to the House of Commons, and had since become Vicar of Kirkham, Prebendary of Westminster, and Dean of Ripon. The state of the parish of Kirkham was thus described by Lord Stanley. This parish contained a population of 12,000 souls, scattered over a district of country comprehending not less than one hundred and thirty square miles, di- vided into seventeen townships. The inconvenience of such a state of things had been perceived so long ago as 1650, and an inquisition took place into the circumstances of the parish; and it was recommended that it should be divided into several, but this recommendation had not been carried into effect. Of the seventeen townships, not less than eight were without any means of religious instruction; and from one of the parish-churches to the oilier the distance was not less than twelve miles, without any intervening place of worship whatever. The House would agree with him that this was a case which strongly illustrated the necessity for that reform in the discipline of the Church, which it was hoped his Majesty's Ministers would shortly bring forward. The great tithes of the parish were wholly appropriate to Christ Church College, Oxford. In 1814, Dr. Webber, then Chaplain to the House, was presented to this living; at which lime the value of the small tithes was but 250E per annum. This sum, how- ever, the parishioners arranged with Dr. Webber to raise to 1000/. per annum —an arrangement ior the extreme liberality of which the reverend gentleman, io letters in Lori Stanley's possession, expressed his high feeling of gratitude; and voluntarily gave .hem his solemn assurance that. no alteration whatever should be made in the amount of the tithe during his incumbency, and that nothing whatever should induce him to reside out of the pariah. By this as- surance the reverend gentleman had abided even after his acceptance of the Prebendary of Westminster ; but in 1829, unfortunately far his parishioners, be was presented to the Deanery of Ripon ; and from that time to the present, with the exception of one occasion, he had not set his foot in Kirkham; thus grossly violating the solemn assurance which, in return for their extreme libe- rality, he had made them on his induction. The petitioners made no reference to Dr. Webber's other dignities; what they were desirous of wee, that the spiritual care of their parish should be fully and fairly attended to. This at present was not the case. One of the parties employed by Dr. Webber, as curate, was a gentleman of the name of Matthews, master of The Grammar School there ; one of the fundamental rules of which institution was, that the master should be allowed to attend to no other business or occupation whatever, but should wholly employ himself in the duties of the school. Besides this, Mr. Matthews was engaged part of his time by Dr. Webber in the collection of tithe. His appointment to either of these employments had been protested against by four of the visiters of the school, but to no purpose.

It was a matter of just complaint with the parishioners that Christ Church, Oxford, which took 3500/. per annum in great tithes, and had moreover received 10,0001. for the renewal of a seven years' lease of them, appropriated no part of these large sums to the purposes for which tithes were originally imposed. But this was not all that the people of Kirkham had to complain of— In 1833, Dr. Webber once more visited Kirkham, but under circumstances not very well calculated to conciliate the parishioners. The object of his return was—notwithstanding his solemn agreement with the parishioners in 1814, though in pursuance of what the reverend gentleman no doubt considered an imperative duty to his successor—to set aside the moduses to which he had before gratefully assented, and to increase the amount of tithes. The parish- ioners of course indignantly resisted this attempt ; and Dr. Webber, after some discussion, proposed to refrain from entering into legal proceedings, on condition that the parishioners should pay all expenses already incurred, should contribute a certain sum for the improvement of the rectory-house, and should raise the small tithes from 10001. to 16001. a year. On these terms, the parishioners were informed Christ Church would consent to divide the parish, but on no other. The parishioners naturally felt themselves aggrieved at this extortionate demand ; considering that the College, in conformity with the spirit of the original endowment, should make a more liberal appropriation out of the great tithe in aid of the small tithe, and fur the purpose of carrying into effect the re- commendations of the inquisition who visited the parish, as before stated, in 1650. The prayer of the petition went to two specific purposes: the first, and he trusted his Majesty's Ministers would attend to the prayer, was, that the House would, without loss of time, pass such measures as would enforce the re- sidence of their minister, in common with all other adequately-remunerated and non-resident clergymen. The next object contemplated by the petitioners, who, as he himself was, were quite aware of the difficulties attending its fulfilment, was that Archbishops and Bishops should have the power of compelling Rectors and Vicars and imp opriators of tithes to build and endow chapels of ease where necessary. As he before said, he was quite aware of the difhculties attending the completion of this object, and he was therefore but the more anxious that the case should be taken up by Christ Church.

Lord Stanley concluded by calling the attention of Sir Robert Inglis to the statements and prayer of the petition ; and expressed an earnest hope that the " great and signal abuses which at present dis- figured the discipline of the Church of England" would be effectually removed.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS contended, that the facts of the case were not altogether correctly put by the petitioners, and that they would bear a different colouring from that given to them by Lord Stanley.

The question was not whether, in the judgment of a third person, the amount of tithes received in a given parish were reasonable or not, or whether the Vicar of Kirkham ought or ought not to be paid 10001. and Christ Church 3500/. a year; but whether either of these parties had asked a single shilling more than they were legally entitled to. As to Christ Church giving up part of the income it derived from any given parish for the purposes referred to, lie had no doubt that any other of the Colleges would be very ready to do so, if his noble friend could induce all other corporations and individuals enjoying Church property to make a similar sacrifice. The noble Secretary for the Home Department, if he were in his place in Parliament—though at present the noble lord had un- happily no such place—might perhaps be able to state bow far the lay impro- priators of such property were disposed to go in furtherance of such charitable purposes. (A laugh from the Opposition benches.) In his absence, Lord Stanley would perhaps state to the House how soon it would meet his conve- nience to bring forward a motion on the subject. ( Continued laughter.)

The compact between Dr. Webber and his parishioners had been first broken by the latter ; for the Doctor was compelled to issue sum- monses for the recovery of his tithes to a considerable extent.

He was as desirous as any man that there should be a resident minister in every parish, either incumbent or curate, but in preference the incumbent him- self; but he was ready to give it as his opinion that there was no parish in England in which the means of religious education were more amply provided than in Kirkham. There were not less than three churches and four chapelries in the parish ; and the actual Vicar, in addition to these, had fitted up a room in another part of the parish for the express purpose of public worship. It was stated that Dr. Webber was non-resident, but this was not the case, as could be shown. Lord Stanley had gone on to allege as another grievance, that the curate had been appointed master of the school. Lord STANLEY-," No : that the master of the school had been appointed curate."

Sir R. INGLIS—" Well, that the master of the school had been appointed curate. The complaint had never been heard of till the time of the getting up this petition ; and as to the allegation that four visiters had objected to the ap- pointment, even if such were the case, it did not much alter it, as the visiters were appointed annually.' But the fact was, so far from the curate being sepas rated either by law or custom from the parish-church, he was, under a decree of the Court of Chancery, dated 1663, compelled to preach there once a month. Lord Stanley stated that the Vicar had absented himself from the parish from /829 till 1833, and only returned under peculiar and mconciliatory circumstances. The fact was, that the object of the reverend gentleman in visiting the parish had nothing in it of a selfish or personal nature; he visited it in pursuance of Lord Tenterden's Act, for the purpose of taking care that his successor's interests should not be compromised by the agreement he had entered into ; and he had distinctly stated, that whatever might be the increase of vicarial tithe, it should not be paid during his incumbency, but only on the accession of the next Vicar.

Sir Robert warned the House against being induced by such petitions is these to give new strength to the pseudo-popular party. If they Permitted the rights of the Church to be once successfully invaded,

that pasty gaining fresh courage from so unbolt nerd a victory, would iroce:d to the destruction of' property of all other kinds. Lord Stanley was one of the last men from whom he should have anticipated an attack on Church property. He was looked upon by the Established Church as one of her champions; and it was a most unexpected thing to hear him bringing forward—he would not say as a matter of charge, but of invidiousness—that a Vicar happened to receive MOM a year, or a College 0500/. When the plus or minus of Church property WAS brought in question, that Church itself was in danger.

Mr. HARVEY expressed his gratification that the subject had been taken up by Lord Stanley; had it proceeded from himself, there would have been a cry of robbery, spoliation, and utter destruction. He could have shown beyond a cavil, had his motion respecting Queen Anne's Bounty been brought forward, that Dr. Webber's was far indeed from being a singular case of clerical rapacity. A Member said, that he was one of the visiters of the school of which the curate alluded to was master. His own property was situate in the parish of Kirkham ; and he thought that the House would be of opinion that there was not much room for raising the tithe, when he informed them, that on potato-ground it was 2.5s. an acre. He could say from his own knowledge, that the statements in the petition were perfectly correct.

Mr. COBBETT stated some instances of clerical neglect of duty, and of the rapacity of lay impropriators.

He knew a parish iu Hampshire which brought not less than 750/. per annum into the pocket of its lay impropriator, Lord Guildford, while the poor parson had but a miserable 151. a year out of it, increased out of Queen Anne's Bounty and other taxes to about 70/. The Church abounded with such abuses, and they were its friends who brought them to light. It was by letting it alone that it would fall. If it was overturned, it would be overturned by itself; it would be its dignitaries who had kicked it down. Many of the Archdeacons and Deans had the sole appropriation of tithes and of twenty things else out of parishes. The Archdeacon of Surry had the tithes of five parishes all nearly joining each other, while the parsons of them had only a miserable pittance. An application Was made to Parliament to tax the people to enable these parsons to live: he hoped that Lord Stanley, who talked of reformation on this subject, would come forward with a real reformation, something tangible. With such a reformation the Church might be saved ; without it the Church would fall, and that right speedily.

The petition was then laid on the table.


On Monday, a new writ having been moved for the election of a Member for the borough of Stafford, in the room of Sir Francis Good- ricke, who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds, Mr. PIVETT moved that the issue of the writ be suspended till the 22d of June. He re- ferred, in support of his motion, to the evidence given before the Com- mittee of 1833 in proof of the general corruption of the electors of Stafford.

It appeared that a regular market for votes was established, plumpers being usually paid for at the rate of 5/., and split-votes at 2/. 10s. As the election pro- ceeded, of course they sometimes became more valuable, and the price rose to 101. or 11/. So great and so systematic was the corruption, that if the money of candidates fell short, individuals in the town did not scruple to come forward with supplies on their behalf. At the last election, before the sitting of the Committee of Inquiry, out of the total number of 1049 electors, 800 polled on the first day, and 48 on the second day, who were bribed ; 141 voters polled on first day, and 56 on the second, who were not bribed. Such was the great dis- proportion of corruption and purity. It might be said that the practice existed in the borough prior to the passing of the Reform Act, and that the general amendment which then took place in the representation would put a stop to the corrupt practices in Stafford. But the fact was, that at the election which took place subsequent to the passing of the Reform Act, not only were the old bur- gesses corrupt, but 85 of the new constituency—the registered householders--were bribed, and 83 not bribed. It appeared by the investigation, that of 151 electors who voted as burgesses, and were also 101. householders, 109 were paid fortheir votes. So confirmed was the practice of bribery, that arrangements were made between the respective candidates that the bribery oath should not be adminis- tered, since to insist upon it would be destructive to the prospects of that party.

He argued, that the dissolution of Parliament and the new election which had taken place since this evidence was given, were no reasons why the House should refuse to take measures to purify the borough, or at least to prevent the recurrence of the corrupt practices complained of : and he quoted the opinions of Mr. Wynn, and the practice of the House in the cases of Grampound and Liverpool, in confirmation of the view he took of the subject.

Mr. HENRY BULWER seconded the motion.

It was opposed by Captain CitErwvsn ; who professed his belief that there had been no bribery at the last election, and. that the constituency was now pure. He also said, it was unfair to put the borough on its trial, now that it was deprived of the services of one of its Members. Mr. COBBETT said, it was universally believed in Stafford, that all the voters were bribed except the thirty-three who supported Sir Charles Wolseley.

Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE and Sir ROBERT PEEL supported, and Mr. E. BULLER and Mr. FORSTER opposed the motion. It was then carried, without a division.


On Wednesday, Mr. POI'LTER moved that the House should resolve itself into a Committee on the Lord's Day Observance Bill.

Several petitions were presented for and against the measure : among the latter, was one from Finsbury, complaining of Sunday gambling by the rich and great in the parishes of St. James and St. George.

Mr. HAWES spoke at some length against the bill ; and moved that it be referred to a Select Committee. As the principle of the measure bad been affirmed on the second reading, it would not be proper at once to reject it in this stage.

Mr. POTTER seconded the amendment.

Mr. POULTER defended his bill. Its object was to secure to the poor man one day of rest out of seven. To refer it to a Select Committee, would be absurd. The whole bill only contained six lines, and would not be half a line to each member of the Committee. The simple ques- tion was, whether common marketing on Sunday should not be abolished. Mr. HUME said, he had been assured by the market-gardeners, that if the bill were passed it would be their ruin, as it was impossible for them to provide the supply for Monday's market without in some de- gree violating the repose and sanctity of the Sabbath. Mr. COBBETT wished to know, whether the thousands who get their living by selling fruits and cakes by the road-side on Sunday would be prevented by the bill from following this business ?

Mr. SPRING RICE wished the bill to be committed. Mr. WARBUR- TON was in favour of referring it to a Select Committee.

Sir ROBERT PEEL considered it of great importance that the Sabbath should be Jnoperlykept, but doubted whether that object would be pro-

moted by legislation. He had rather trust to the influence of manners and the increase of morality. He was of opinion that the Sabbath was more properly kept now than formerly ; and nothing would be easier

than to show that this change for the better had not been brought about by legislation. If this bill were passed, the statute 29th Charles II. must still be retained, to show what the law really was ; as the present bill only rendered one part of that act more stringent, and left the rest of it unrepealed.

" The honourable gentleman says there is no occasion to consider the bill with any great anxiety, or to discuss it at any great length, because all the enacting

part of it is comprised within six lines. That may be very true ; the bill itself may not exceed six lines, and yet it may be very important. For instance, you may say that there shall be no drinking on the Sabbath-day ; and that provision,

if you like, may be comprised within a single line but still, every one would be

aware that theprovision, though short, was of a most sweeping and comprehen- sive nature, and that it would be necessary to look with great jealousy and ap- prehension to the practical consequences that might ensue from it. Now I will prove, that in carrying this bill into effect, it will.he constantly necessary to refer to the statute of Charles the Second. One of the offences under the statute of Charles is the letting out a boat for Sunday."

Mr. Pon ILTER—" That clause has been repealed." Sir ROBERT PEEL—" But how are the people to know that? The honour- able gentleman founds his measure upon the statute of Charles—calls it a mea- sure for enforcing and rendering more effectual the statute of Charles • and then, when one of the very first offences specified in the statute of Charles is men- tioned, he gets up and tells us that other bills have since passed by which the penalties upon several offences enumerated and provided for in the statute of Charles have been repealed. How, then, is the bill to be understood? The statute of Charles, in the next place, provides that no drover, waggoner, butcher, i &c. shall travel or come into any inn or lodging on the Sabbath-day, under the penalty of 20s.' Is that a part of the present bill?" Mr. PouLTER—" No."

Sir ROBERT PEEL—" But is not the dealing with these persons part of the bill ? I was at first inclined to support the proposition of the Member for Lam- beth, for referring the bill to a Select Committee; but, upon further considera-

tion, I think it would be infinitely better for the House of Commons to meet the report fairly, and to defeat it upon principle. If it should be the opinion of the House that it is dangerous—that we may defeat our own objects by legis- lating on the report, surely it would be better, rather than to create a vexatious delay, by referring it to a Select Committee, when a report may he made at such

a late period in the session as to prevent the possibility of any effectual progress

being afterwards made—rather than to adopt that course, surely it would be better to act upon the suggestion I now make. I am opposed to the proposi- tion for referring the bill to a Select Committee, because some gentlemen might think that an indirect mode of defeat. I am, therefore, prepared to go into committee this evening, and to allow the honourable gentleman to make the bill as perfect as he can ; and when he has taken that course, I shall call upon him either to drop the bill altogether, or to leave the law as he found it, and to trust to the continued operation of manners."

The difficulties of carrying this bill into effect would be enormous.

4' The statute of Charles attempted to prevent travelling of all descrip- tions on the Sabbath, as well by the ordinary means of land carriage as

by boats. Why is that abandoned-in the present bill ? If it be wrong for the bumbler classes to travel by steam to Richmond on Sunday, surely it must be equally wrong for us to be travelling in our carriages on the same day. I do believe that the rich are the greater offenders. Enactments of this kind tend only to create disunion between the richer and lower classes, because the restric- tions which they provide apply principally to the latter. To any law proceed- ing upon that principle I must decidedly object. If you legislate upon the subject at all, it ought to be impartially : the restrictionsyou provide should apply equally to all classes. The honourable Member for Shaftesbury, despairing to make the statute of Charles efficient upon the two points I have enume- rated, takes another point and endeavours to make it more stringent than it was originally intended to be. Then I say lie ought to repeal all the rest. He should either leave the law as it is, or else make it more simple and plain. That is not his object. But, considering the pains and trouble to which he has gone, no doubt with the best motives, I shall not throw any impediments in his way on the present occasion ; but I shall reserve to myself the right—when he has reduced the bill to as perfect a shape as he can—either of calling upon the House to reject the bill altogether, or, if the House be determined to legislate upon the subject, then to require that we should so consolidate the laws, as that the public may understand what is an offence against the law and what is not."

Mr: HAWES wiandrew his amendment, and said he would take the sense of the House on the bringing up of the report.

Sir JOAN CAMPBELL expressed his entire concurrence in what had fallen from Sir Robert Peel.

Mr. GOULBURN said a few words in favour of going into Committee. The question was then put, and the House went into Committee. Mr. POULTER proposed to introduce the words " in an open shop,"

in order to obviate some of Sir Robert Peel's objections.

Sir ROBERT PEEL wished to know what was meant by "an open shop." Did it mean selling at a-stall, or not? It was material to be very definite upon this point ; because the people would regard this bill as the latest legislative de- claration on the subject ; and if selling at a stall was not to be included under the terms " open shop," then, instead of putting an end to trading on the Sabbath-day, the effect of the bill would be to make that trading be carried on more publicly than ever, inasmuch as a stall was more open than a shop. Mr. Poulter excluded the sale of animals on the Sabbath ; but if the words " open shop " did not mean a stall, there would be an inconsistency in the bill, for am- mars were always sold openly, and not in shops. lf, therefore, it were legal to Hat a stall, it would also be legal to sell cattle on the Sabbath-day. • Mr. POULTER said, the word " animals " was intended to prevent the sale of cattle in any way.

Mr. Hawes asked whether Mr. Poulter intended to shut up coffee- shops and prevent the sale of newspapers on Sunday?

Mr. POULTER thought that coffee-shops ought not to be excluded from the operation of the bill. It would also prevent the sale of newspapers ; but any Member might propose an exception in favour of newspapers, and the House would deal with it as it thought fit. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE suggested, that sellers of shell-fish should be ex- empted from the operation of the bill. Mr. POTTER recommended that the sellers of fruit, flowers, herbs, confectionery, soda-water and ginger-beer, should not be liable to its penalties.

Mr. ROEBUCK game notice, that be should move a clause to the effect that all the club-houses, taverns, and hotels, be closed in London on Sunday, and that no private carriage be suffered to be used on that day. Mr. EWART said, that the bill would prevent the transmission of newspapers by vessels which sailed on Sunday ; and this would be a great inconvenience in Liverpool.

Mr. CHARLES BULLER remarked, that the only refreshments which the bill would allow to be sold on Sunday, were medicines.

The bill was an unequal and unjust one, preventing the poor from working on Sunday for gain, and allowing the rich. It was notorious that a great por- tion of the business of his Majesty's counsel learned in the law was transacted on Sunday. The very same learned and estimable men who pursued this prac- tice would have to prosecute the unfortunate persons who would be indicted under this hill.

Mr. BAINES said, the discussion on this bill would prove offensive to the public, from the tone of levity with which it had been carried on.

Mr. HAWES thought it was rather too much for Mr. Baines to take upon himself to lecture the House.

Mr. ANDREW JOHNSTON hoped that Mr. Poulter would persevere in his bill. He also expressed his regret that Members did riot pay more attention to the wishes of their constituents.

Mr. O'CONNELL said he fully participated in the feebly,' of the Mem- ber for Leeds, that respect and deference ought to be paid to the wishes of their constituents ; and certainly a lecture on the same subject came well from the Member for St. Andrew's. ("Hear, hear ! " and much laughter.) For his own part,. he had merry constituents; and he liked a laugh sometimes, even on a grave topic,—upon which topic he could fancy a gravity that was in- finitely more offensive than levity itself. It was in gravity that persecution was founded, and the most effective way of meeting bigotry was by turning it into ridicule. The weakness of any man, too, was best exhibited by laughing at such an attempt as the present. The time was gone by when piety was to be enforced by legislative enactment. Could the honourable Member seriously think that he could succeed in passing a Sunday bill through the present House of Commons? There had been a very grave case decided lately before Lord Jeffrey, where, after a great deal of expense and trouble had been incurred, a barber's boy was decreed not to have been contumacious in refusing to shave on a Sunday. Mr. JOHNSTON would make one observation, since be bad been so pointedly alluded to— A great deal had been said about the vote he had given on Lord John Rus- sell's resolution, and he had been called upon by a number of his constituents to resign his seat in consequence of that vote. Upon that request being made to him, he acted on advice on which he considered he could rely. He placed a simple statement of the matter before Lord John Russell, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Member for the Tower Hamlets, and put the question to them whether, as a man of honour, he was bound to resign his trust. They gave their opinion, that, in the circumstances, they did not consider he was. Upon that statement of opinion, and not relying upon his own judgment of the course lie ought to take, he had continued to hold his seat.

The House resumed : the report was brought up, and the bill or. dered to be recommitted.


Lord BROUGHAM called the attention of the Peers, on Thursday, to a series of resolutions on the subject of education, which he intended to submit to their Lordships' consideration. He began by adverting to the circumstance of his having been nearly the whole of his Par- liamentary life in a minority of the House of Commons, as well as opposed to a large majority of the Peers. This, however, had not pre- vented him from carrying many measures, unconnected with party politics ; and he hoped that on this occasion he should be successful also, and that the subject would be considered without reference to the party who introduced it. He proceeded to remind the House of the fierce opposition which former efforts to instruct the people had en- countered ; while he rejoiced to know that at the present time there was a very different feeling almost universally prevalent. Lord Brougham read a number of detailed statements ; which proved, that since the year 1817, the number of scholars educated at unendowed schools had prodigiously increased, while the scholars at wealthy and endowed establishments had fallen off, notwithstanding the increase of population. At present, it appeared, that in Middlesex and Lance- shire public instruction was the least widely diffused. He warmly approved of the plan adopted by the House of Commons, of voting an annual sum in aid of the exertions of those who endeavoured to establish schools. This system had worked so well, that he preferred its extension to the adoption of any new one. He dwelt upon the in- fluence of education in the prevention of crime ; and, with due deference to Lord Denman, he would say it was the only effectual means of preventing crime. It appeared that the great majority of criminals were to be found in the uneducated population of large towns. The Continental Governments were aware of the influence of education in diminishing crimes, and were taking measures to establish Normal and other schools ; though the study of Civil History was for- bidden in most of them.

They were allowed to study the history of a moss, of a stone, of a rush, of a weed ; but they were not allowed to study the history of their own country ; they were not allowed to inquire what had been done by their forefathers ; they were not allowed to learn all that was most valuable for human beings to know. Civil history, indeed ! Why, that would tell them of privileges invaded, of rights denied, of promises made under the dread of foreign invasion, broken as soon as the danger was ended ; of the dethronement of one usurper, merely for the purpose of changing him for another. Civil history ! Why, It would tell them of what had occurred, at least in their neighbourhood, within a few years; it would tell them of an innocent, a virtuous, an unoffending people, overrun, conquered, and enslaved, by governments that now allowed their subjects to study mosses. It would tell them that the very Bibles and Liturgy, which their kings commanded them to read, were profaned by having been used in thanks- givings in temples for the success of the atrocities of those kings. It would tell them of monarchs whose broken pledges were thousands in number ; of mo- narchs who counted the years of their reign by violations of the rights of their people; of monarchs who conceived that they had lost a day, if in that day they bad not committed a crime. It would tell them of a monarch of whom it had been said, that he never went to bed without having first perpetrated some crime or cruelty.

He was perfectly astonishecrat the progress in obtaining information which some children had made in the Metropolitan Schools.

As a proof of their usefulness, he would mention one at a very small distance from that House, in the Borough Road, which he had been induced to visit; and certainly a more extraordinary spectacle of the progress in obtaining iufur- nation which might be made by children, he had never seen or heard of at any place, in any country, or at any time. It was perfectly wonderful how the human faculties could at so early an age be cultivated to so marvellous a degree. A dozen or two of them were asked such questions as what was.the interest of 5331. 7s. 4d. ? they were not allowed any time, and their answers were as cor- net as they were immediate. They were never puzzled in any case of calcula- tion but our, and that was a case in which he should himself have experienced difficulty. Ile repeated, that he had never witnessed a more extraordinary ex- hibition. Among other things, he saw a boy take a slate, and, without any copy, but solely from memory, trace upon it the outline of Palestine, marking all the variations of the coast, the bays, &c. inserting all the principal towns, and adding their ancient as well as their modern names. Now all this was real, substantial knowledge. It would be infinitely advantageous if in London five Normal Schools were established, fur the purpose of Instructing teachers not only in knowledge, but also in that of which they were mainly ignorant—the ben modes of communicating that knowledge to children, the best modes of ope- rating upon their minds and forming their habits. These Normal Schools would speedily supply five or six hundred able and accomplished masters, from whose labours throughout the country the most beneficial consequences would soon result.

With respect to the funds necessary to extend the benefits of educa- tion, there would be no difficulty, if an act of Parliament were passed, authorizing the transfer of property from establishments whose object was not beneficial, such as foundling hospitals, and allowing trustees to fulfil the real intentions of founders of charities by freeing them from certain legal fetters, by which they were hampered in the execution of their trust, and thus compelled to frustrate its objects. He would re- commend that a Board of Commissioners should be formed to watch over the application of funds thus procured; and he would also em- power them to prevent the virtual defeat of the objects of certain en. dowed schools, by the trustees of those schools, who allowed the master to take boarders into his house, and thus withdraw his attention from the scholars, whose education he was paid for out of the funds of the establishment.

He knew from his experience in the Court of Chancery, where cases bearing upon the question to which he intended to call their Lordships' attention had come under his consideration,—and he had been also made aware of the fact by his previous knowledge upon this subject,—that there were many day.schools which were intended to afford useful instruction to the poor, but from which, though the poor child was not actually excluded, though the door was not flung in his face as he attempted to enter, and although the master of the school never openly and undisguiseilly flew in the face of the duty which he owed to its founders, still he was permitted covertly to work its ruin (as far as the inten- tions of those who endowed it were concerned) by the reception of a nutrileT of respectable boarders, who, being unwilling to mix with those whose ought alone to partake of the bene5ts of the establishment, increased exactly in proportion to the diminution in the number of the poorer class of scholars. It was not wonderful, under such eircumstances, seeing that the master had a direct inte- rest in lessening the number of his pourer scholars, if he treated these children with, perhaps, bare civility, but never with kindness—if he behaved towards them in a harsh, unfeeling, and rigorous manner, the inevitable consequence of which was, that the blame was frequently thrown on the boy which should be visited on the master. lie knew of the effect produced by this system in some instances which had come under his observation ; for in the course of three mouths whilst he sat in the Court of Chancery, four or five cases hail been submitted to him, in which the foundation had dwindled down from 180 pupils to one or two. The rent of the premises was paid as punctually as ever, the accommo- dation for scholars was as good as when the endowment had taken place, all the expenses of the school were defrayed ; but all the benefit del ived from it accrued not to the poor but to the rich, and the interest of the master seemed to be alone consulted.

Lord Brougham concluded by reading fourteen resolutions, in which the suggestions and most of the arguments of his speech were embo- died. At present he would not make any motion on the subject. Lord 'MELBOURNE expressed his entire concurrence in the view taken by Lord Brougham of this subject, and his perfect conviction that the

virtue, peace, and order of society, were inseparably connected with a well-directed system of education.

" All the objections which have hitherto been urged against diffusing educa- tion throughout the community (and some of the arguments urged against it are not without force), have been applicable to schemes of education ill-consi- dered and ill-directed—to the abuses and evils resulting from a bad system, and do not atall bear upon such a plan as would enable the poor to receive instruc- tion and information, and induce habits of industry, prudence, and frugality. I have only to say, in reference to the resolutions of my noble and learned friend, that as the Government are called upon by them to interfere with long-existing privileges, and to interpose it authority in matters of vital importance to the community, the course taken by the noble and learned lord, which admits of deliberation and caution, is a wise and prudent one ; the advantage of which shall not be lost sight of by his Majesty's Government, who will, I am satisfied, give the closest and most anxious attention to the propositions which have been submitted to your Lordships' decision."

The Bishop of GLOUCESTER. and the Archbishop of CANTERBURY declared, that they entirely concurred in the greater part of what had fallen from Lord Brougham but remarked, that to make education really beneficial, it must be founded on the basis of religion. Lord DENXIAN concurred in the opinion that offences against the laws would be diminished by the spread of education.

He confessed he had, after reflection upon the question—not as a subject for rhetorical declamation, but as one demanding grave attention, doubted how far the State was justified in inflicting punishment for an offence against the com- mission of which it had taken no pains to guard. If the Government in a ease of serious offence shared any portion of the guilt which was pronounced against the offender, they certainly incurred severer responsibility when they suffered the young and comparatively unsophisticated mind to be contaminated, on the commission of a trivial transgression, by the example and practice of in. mates of a prison. How vast a proportion of the offences which disg.race society were occasioned by the immoral contagion of vicious habits which Infested our prisons l With the general views of Lord Brougham he. entirely agreed ; and expressed a hope that the object for which he had so long struggled was on the point of being accomplished. Lord Baotronaat, in reply, admitted that he was aware of the dila- culties which surrounded this question in reference to religion; but tirotirothought he should, at a future time, be able to lay a plan before the House in which all objections on that score would be obviated.


In the House of Lords, on Thursday, the Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a petition from (he said) fifty thousand Protestants of the North of Ireland, in favour of the Established religion of the country ; and took that opportunity of asking Lord Melbourne, what steps had been taken to prevent the recurrence of such illegal processions as that which had escorted Lord Mulgrave into Dublin ?

Lord MELBOURNE remarked upon the delay of Lord Londonderry in presenting his petition; which, as it had been got up six months ago, might have been laid before the House at an earlier period. With re- gard to the Dublin procession, he was ready to give an explanation ; and that was, that he did not believe any thing had occurred in the slightest degree illegal. There had been a great deal of misstatement respecting the flags and banners. There was much good-humoured enthusiasm and glad excitement, but nothing occurred which could be called illegal in the slightest possible degree, or which exceeded the limits allowed to the expression of popular feeling on such occasions.

Lord LONDONDERRY was not prepared to retract what he bad stated on the subject of the banners and flags displayed in the procession.

The Earl of WICKLOW said, that until Lord Melbourne's statement was contradicted by other evidence it must be believed.

But if it was true, as now stated, that there were no proceedings of an illegal nature, then he must say that greater falsehoods or more gross fabrications had never issued from the press of any country than had issued from the press of Ireland on this subject ; and not only from the press of Ireland, but of this country. If the statements made were not true, it was a case of most extraor. . dinary fabrication. But Viscount Melbourne having stated that there was ma ground for the representations that had been made, they were bound to wait till evidence was produced before that House by some noble lord, or by some other witness who had seen what was now denied.

He would take that opportunity of doing justice to Mr. Sergeant O'Loghlen, whom he had unintentionally aggrieved by a statement he had made in the House.

At the time that he made the statements, he declared that he had no authority for them but that which lie saw in the public prints. He had stated that the individual in question had been present at a public meeting, and had heard a toast—tlw Repeal of the Union—drunk, without any expression of disappro- bation. Ile had said that he made these statements from the newspapers-' he believed them, as they had not been contradicted. He had this day received a letter from that gentleman, stating that he felt much hurt at the publicity that he had given to the charge ; that he considered it as a grave charge brought against.him ; and that there was not the slightest foundation for it—that he had not attended any such meeting, and that no such toast had been drunk. The whole tenor of his letter showed that he did not approve of the Repeal. It gave him pleasure to see this. But the gentleman who wrote this letter made two mistakes. In the first place, he conceived that he had first given publicity to the statement, and then he conceived that a charge was made against him. He had not given publicity to the statement : it had first appeared in the Irish newspapers ; and then in a paper of the greatest circulation, and certainly the best conducted in this country—he meant the Times newspaper. Last night, the subject was again brought before the House by Lord RODEN ; who restated what Lords Londonderry and Wicklow had said respecting the illegality of the procession.

Lord Met.nounNE repeated, that his information from the highest quarter—from an eye-witness of all that occurred—convinced him that the procession was not illegal ; and if it were true that ban- ners with " O'Connell forever," or " Repeal of the Union " inscribed on them, were carried in the procession, that would not make it ille- gal, as the repeal of the Union, like the repeal of Tithes, might be car- ried in a legal way. He also reminded the House, that ass Orange flag had been waved over Lord.Haddington's box at the Theatre, all the time his Lordship was there.

Lord HADDINGTON explained, that this was a mere outbreak (Ifeeling from a few persons ; and that he himself was not aware of the flag being hung out until he had been some time in the Theatre.

Lord Wrextow, after drawing a distinction between Lord Hadding- ton's and Lord Mulgrave's processions, referred to Marquis Welles- ley's resignation ; which he intimated bad been caused by i his disappro- bation of the extent to which he found Mr. O'Connell influenced the Government.

Marquis WELLESLEY said, there were motives of delicacy towards Lord Haddington and Lord Mulgrave which would prevent him from discussing the subject under debate ; and with respect to his resignation of the office of Lord Chamberlain, he would not enter upon that subject either. He would only say, that when he resigned he had not heard of Lord Mulgrave's procession ; and he begged noble lords would not be led away by the notion that his resignation was in any way connected with the entry of Lord Mulgrave into Dublin. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that Lord Wellesley must have known what had been said in the House and in the public journals on this subject. He had himself attended to it ; and he felt himself at liberty to st to what he had stated, in consequence of a communication he had had with an Illustrious Personage, who declared that he had the fact from the mouth of the noble Marquis himself."

The noble Marquis opposite seems to entertain notions with respect to my reading in which 'no is exceedingly inaccurate; it is not so extensive as to make me complete master of every sort of rogue report that is spread abroad. (A laugh.) I shall add one word more. 1 do not feel called upon—I should not feel justified, in entering in this House upon an explanation of the causes of my resignation of the office of Lord Chant - berlain. If your Lordships are of opinion that I should enter on that explanation, let me be called upon in a distinct and regular manner ; or, if you choose, institute an inquiry into the subject, if you think it sufficiently grave; but without that I shill not think that I ant required to give an explanation, nor shall I give it. I shall reserve my opinion on all public questions as an independent man, as I now am not engaged in any office, nor in any connexion which can in the very slightest degree fetter the ex- pression of my opinion on public affairs. That opinion will be formed as my reason suggests, and delivered as my pleasure may dictate; for it is not my duty as an officer of Government—it is not my task, to come down here and answer any questions that noble lords may please to put to me. My opinion on public matters trill be formed with inde- pendence, industry, deliberation, and, I trust, with integrity. Further I will not go, at the present moment, in answering the questions of the noble lord opposite. I will not state the grounds of my resignation till I am called on so to do by your LonIships I am compelled by proceedings of this House, or by your instituting an inquiry which shall render my doing so absolutely necessary. I shall then, and not till then, think at to reply to those questions. I will not make any disclosures not called for in a

regular manner." Lord 1ViceLow asked Lord Wellesley to state, "as a particular favour," whether his resignation was or was not connected with the Irish appointments ?

Marquis WELLESLEY--." I am not at all required to answer such a question."

Lord HARROWBY, Lord MELBOURNE, Lord FARNHAM, Lord WHARNCLIFFE, the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, and the Duke of Rica- MOND, made some observations on the subject of the procession ; and the matter then dropped.


In the House of Commons, last night, Mr. SPIERS moved the second reading of the Liverpool Police Bill. Mr. EWART moved that it be read a second time that day six months. He said, in point of fact, it was a bill to enable the Corporation of Liverpool to pay the clergy of that town out of the Corporate funds, which were the property of aRDissenters as well as Churchmen. It was au attempt to destroy the effect of the intended measure of Corporation Reform, and to saddle all classes with the support of the clergy of the Establishment. As to the Police part of the bill, there was no occasion for it, as the Corpora- tion Commissioners had declared the Police of Liverpool to be very effective.

Lord SANDON said, that at present the Liverpool clergy were paid out of Church-rates ; and that last year Lord Althorp and Lord John Russell had admitted, that when Church-rates were abolished, some such measure as this would be necessary and proper. The plan was generally acceptable in Liverpool ; and as long as an Established reli. gion supported by all classes was kept up, the principle on which Mr. EwAter's objections rested could not be recognized by the Legislature.

A long and animated discussion followed ; in the course of which, Mr. THORNILY, Mr. SHELL, 31r. O'CONNELL, Dr. BOWRING, Mr. WiLes, and Mr. MARK PHILLIPS supported Mr. Ewurt's amendment ; and Sir ROBERT INGLIS, Lord FRANCIS EGERTON, Mr. GOIJLBURN, and Colonel SIIITHORPE, spoke in favour of the bill. Lord STANLEY wished the bill read a second time, and the third reading to be de- layed until the Corporation Reform Bill had been introduced. In the course of the debate, there was an altercation between Lord Stanley and 131r. Shell, which provoked some very warm language from the latter. On a division, the numbers were—for the second reading, 185;

against it, 171 ; majority, 14. From a list of the minority given in the Chronicle, it does not appear that any of the Ministers voted against the bill.


CortronATioe REFORM. Lord JOHN RUSSELL gave notice, last night, amidst loud cheers, that on Monday the 1st of June, he should move for leave to bring in a bill for the better regulation of the Muni- cipal Corporations of England and \Vales.

DISSENTERS' MARRIAGE BILL. On the motion of Sir ROBERT PEEL, this bill was read a second time, proforma, last night. Sir Ro- BERT stated his willingness to give it into Lord John Russell's hands. Mr. POTTER and Dr. LUSIIINGTON thought it would be advisable to postpone the measure till next session ; and Mr. Potter wished a bill to he brought in connected with a system of general registration.

REGISTRATION OF VOTERS BILL. This bill was referred to a Se- lect Committee, last night, on the motion of Lord John Russell.

EDUCATION IN IRELAND. On Tuesday, Mr. WYSE, with the con- currence of Lord MORPF.TH and Mr. SPRING RICE, obtained leave to bring in u bill to establish a Board for the Advancement of Education in Ireland. The object of Mr. WYSE appeared to be to extend the benefits of the Government plan now in operation.

AMENDMENT OF THE SCOTTISH LAW COURTS. Mr. WALLACE obtained leave, on Tuesday, to bring in four bills to improve the prac- tice of certain courts of law in Scotland.

First, that of the Courts of Session, Teinds, and Justiciary ; also to regulate and define the duties of the Judges, and of the clerks and their officers, and to abolish the fee-fund and other dues of those courts. Second, To regulate the forms, shorten the delays, and dimiuis'a the expense of the above courts, and in appeals to the House of Lords. Third, To explain, regulate, and improve the practice and jurisdiction of the Sheriff and Burgh Courts. And the fourth was, To amend the Small Debt Act, and enforce the holding of Small Debt Circuit Courts by Sheriffs ; also to extend its provisions to the amount of 101., and to abolish the arrestnient of workmen's wages, and imprisonment for debt for sums under 101. He did not feel himself called upon to enter into explana- tions relative to those bills, but should reserve what he had to say for another occasion.

Sir WILLIAM RAE thought the course pursued by Mr. Wallace was very inconvenient. But Mr. MURRAY (the Lord Advocate) said, that Mr. Wallace bad collected a vast deal of important information on the subjects of his bills ; he did not believe that the bringing in of the bills would impede other measures, and he should support the motion. Mr. SINCLAIR considered Mr. Wallace's motion as unnecessary and premature ; while Mr. CurtAn FERGUSSON could see no objection to it.

WILES EXECUTION BILL. This bill went through a Committee of the House on Wednesday, and the report was ordered to be received on Wednesday next.

SEAMEN ENLISTMENT BILL. This bill was read a second time on Wednesday, on the motion of Sir JAMES GRAHAM.

ORDNANCE ESTIMATES. Previously to the House of Commons going into a Committee fo Supply on Monday, Mr. SPRING RICE mentioned, in reply to Mr. Hume, that it was the intention of Ministers immediately to renew the Commission appointed by Earl Grey's Government to inquire into the propriety of amalgamating the Civil and Military departments of the Ordnance.

Colonel LEITH HAY, the House being in Committee, brought for- ward the Ordnance Estimates for the year. He stated, that after due examination, he found the Estimates which had been prepared by his predecessors in office as low in amount as was compatible with the efficiency of the service, and had therefore adopted them. On the whole, there bad been some small reductions.

Various sums, amounting to upwards of a million sterling, were then voted with little opposition ; and the House resumed.

ARMY ESTIMATES. Several sums for the payment of General Officers, Half-pay, Widows' Pensions, &c. amounting to about 1,200,0001. were voted last night in a Committee of Supply. In the course of the discussion, Mr. HUME objected to the continuance of Lord HILL at the Horse Guards, on account of his Tory politics. Lord Howiee said, that the patronage of the Army was impartially distributed by Lord Hill ; and that it was not the wish of Ministers to make the patronage either of the Army or Navy subservient to the sup- port of Government, but to the good of the service. Sir RUFANE Dwane, bore testimony to Lord HILL's strict impartiality in the dis- tribution of his patronage.

NAVY ESTIMATES. Last night, about 300,000/. was voted for the support of Naval Establishments abroad and at home, New Works, Improvements in Yards, and the Commissariat Department.

CORN TRADE OF THE CHANNEL ISLANDS. On the motion of Mr. POULETT THOMSON, a Select Committee was appointed on Tuesday, to consider the state of the corn trade with the Channel Islands. Mr. Thomson said— In consequence of a statement made to that House, the Commissioners of Customs were directed to make a report of the quantity of corn exported from the Channel Islands. Upon this report being laid upon the table of the House, his predecessor, Lord Ashburton, had given notice of his intention to move that no more corn should be imported into this country from the Channel Islands. It was, however, subsequently ascertained that the report was incorrect, and that the quantity of corn sent to England was only :1000 quarters a year (on an average of five years), instead of 6000 quarters, which had been stated to the House. He considered it then but justice to the inhabitants of these islands, who were, upon an erroneous report, upon the point ri being deprived of a pfi. vilege which they had enjoyed for a long period, which was conceded to them by charter, and confirmed by act of Parliament, to propose that a solemn inquiry should be instituted into the case with a view of adopting the recommendation of the Committee, or of taking such a course as the House might think proper, after being informed through the Committee of the facts brought under its con- sideration.

SLAVE TRADE. On the motion of Mr. BUXTON, on Tuesday, all address to the King was agreed to, requesting his Majesty to take effectual measures to put an end to the slave-trade, by endeavouring to form such treaties with foreign nations as will extend the limits of the right of searching slave-vessels to the whole of the Western and Eastern coasts of Africa and the island of Madagascar, allow the vessels cap- tured to be broken up, and declare the trade in slaves to be piracy. Mr. HUME seconded the motion ; which Mr. SPRING RICE did not oppose ; though he said that treaties were actually pending with Spain and Portugal, having for their object the accomplishment of Mr. Bux- ton's views.

SPIRIT LICENCES. Mr. DIVETT, on Tuesday, moved that the House should go into Committee to consider the subject of spirit-licences,

with a view to remove the inequality of their pressure, which was a great grievance to the smaller publicans. Mr. SPRING RICE said, that the tax yielded 150,0001., which was too large a sum for him to give up

altogether ; but he undertook to do his best to put an end to that ine- quality in its pressure which was complained of. Several Members, among whom were Lord SANDON, Mr. HUME, Mr. PRYME, Sir G. STRICKLAND, Mr. ROBINSON, and Mr. LAW HODGES, agreed that the present mode of levying the duty was a grievance. Mr. DIVETT, in consequence of what had fallen from Mr. Spring Rice, withdrew his motion.

DIVISIONS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. WARD, on Tuesday, brought for- ward the plan of taking the divisions, as recommended by the Com- mittee of which he was Chairman ; but subsequently withdrew it, on the suggestion of Mr. SPRING RICE, until the Building Committee of the new Houses of Parliament could he consulted on the subject. Mr. Rice wished Mr. Ward to be appointed a member of that Committee; the delay would not exceed a week : he fully agreed with Mr. Ward in the principle of his motion.

YOUGHALL ELECTION. On Tuesday, the following gentlemen were appointed a Committee to try the merits of the petition against the return of Mr. John O'Connell for Youghail : Lord Alford, Lord Russell, Messrs. French, Burdon, Handley, Mackenzie, East, Turner. Heathcoute, Bewes, and Sir John Mordaunt.

ROSCOMMON ELECTION. Sir George Crewe, Sir William Moles- worth, Messrs. Tooke, *Hope Johnstone, Bingham Baring, Barnard, Dobbin, Paget, Leader, Brotherton, and Richard Walker, were on the same day appointed a Committee on the petition against the return of O'Connor Don for the county of Roscommon.

Elvers ELECTION. On Thursday, a Committee on the Ennis Elec- tion petition was balloted for, in the usual way ; and the House then went into a discussion respecting the Trinity Harbour Bill, when Mr. DYSON appeared at the bar with the reduced names of the Members bal- loted for on the Ennis Election Committee ; and on the Members being called to the table to be sworn, it appeared that one Member, Mr. Greene, did not answer to his name.

The SPEAKER inquired, whether any Member could state that be had seen Mr. Greene in the House since four o'clock, and during the ballot. He was under the impression, and he believed he shared it with the House, that Mr. Greene had answered twice to his name. Mr. HARDY said he believed Mr. Greene was at present in Lanca- shire. He had seen a letter from him that morning, dated four days ago from Lancashire. A Member was understood to say, he bad seen Mr. Greene in the House that day. ■ Mr. GOULBURN observed, that he did not know any case that could be said to furnish a precedent to the present one. Mr. WYNN said a few words, but was totally inaudible in the Gallery. After the lapse of a short interval, The SPEAKER said, that the only course open to the House Was to adjourn the swearing in of the Committee; and in the mean time to have inquiry made as to whether Mr. Greene had been there at four o'clock, and if he answered to his name on its being called on the ballot ; a misapprehension, if it were one, that he laboured under in common with several other Members. If Mr. Greene could not, be

found, the consequence would be that the House must proceed to the appointment of a new Committee. The Members uni.worn then retired from the table, and the discus- sion on Mr. Tooke's motion was resumed.

A long desultory conversation, in which Mr. O'Comerr.t„ Mr. HOME, and the ATTORNEY-GENERAL took part, then ensued ; but was interrupted by

Mr. FINN, who rose to order, and called the attention of the House to the provisions of the act of Parliament regulating the mode of trying controverted elections. It was expressly provided, that until the ballot was concluded, the House should not proceed with any other business, except to adjourn the order of the day for taking into consideration the election petition.

The SPEAKER said, that until some further information was afforded as to the fact whether or not Mr. Greene was present during the ballot, it was impossible to say that the ballot had been completed.

The conversation on Mr. Tooke's motion was then resumed ; and after a few words from Mr. HARDY, Mr. HUME, the LORD ADVOCATE, Mr. WYNN, Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY, Mr. AGLIONBY, and Mr. GIs- BORNE, it was again interrupted by the entrance into the House of Mr. GREENE, who was called on by all sides of the House. Mr. Greene said, that he had just been informed that his name had been called from the reduced list of the Members to serve on the Ennis Election petition. He had to state, that he had not been present during the ballot, for that he had but just that moment arrived at the House.

The SPEAKER was understood to intimate, that the ballot was void, and that the order of the day for the consideration of the Ennis Election petition was postponed to Friday.

Ste WILLIAM GOSSETT. Lord JOHN Remota, when questioned last night by Mr. O'BRIEN, declined stating the intentions of Go- vernment in regard to retaining or dismissing Sir William Gossett.

Loan PALmErts-rox. In reply to some questions from Lord DAR- LINGTON, Lord Jour; RUSSELL said that Lord Palmerston's absence from the House was merely temporary.

COLONEL Fox. Lord JOHN RUSSELL mentioned, last night, in re- ply to Colonel SIBTHORPE, that there was no intention whatever of sending Colonel Fox to Canada as a Commissioner.

THAMES TUNNEL. Mr. SPRING RICE Stated, on Monday, in reply to Mr. WALTER, that 30,000/. had been advanced by Government to the Thames Tunnel Company, under the restriction that it was only to be applied to the "under water works" by way of experiment ; but that by an act passed on the last day of the session of 1833, 270,0001. might be lent to the company on the security of all its property. Mr. WALTER said, be thought that security was no security at all.