Dilates anti Vroutbings in laarlianttnt.

LORD ELLEN/10E017011'S PROCLAMATIONS.

Lord Ellenborough and his proclamations formed the subject of great debates in both Houses of Parliament on Thursday night. The reports extend over thirty-three columns of the Morning Chronicle !

The particular subject in the House of Commons was the reconquest of the Somnath gates ; the debate arising on the following resolution, moved by Mr. VERNON &Erni-

"That this House, having regard to the high and important functions of the Governor-General of India, the mixed character of the native population, and the recent measures of the Court of Directors for discontinuing any seeming sanction to idolatry in India, is of opinion that the conduct of Lord Ellen- borough, in issuing the general orders of the 16th November 1642, and in ad- dressing the letter of the same date to all the chiefs, princes, and people of India, respecting the restoration of the gates of a temple to Somnath, is unwise, indecorous, and reprehensible."

This resolution was supported by Mr. MACAULAY, Mr. MANGLES, Mr. HUME, Mr. PLUMPTRE, Sir GEORGE GREY, Lord PararnasTorr, and Lord Joan Russzu.; it was opposed by Mr. EMERSON TENNENT, Mr. Hooa, Mr. Escorr, Mr. CHARLES WYNN,* Lord STANLEY, atri Sir ROBERT PEEL.

Mr. VERNON So= led off the arguments for the motion by con- tending, that if Lord Ellenborough's acts were viewed as a whole, as his defenders claimed, it made the case against him still stronger ; and he proved the proclamation about the gates to be a complete mis- representation of the objects of the war. There were seventeen passages in his letters which showed that he early contemplated the withdrawal of the troops in his letter to General Nott, of the 4th July 1842, he dissuaded from "any hazardous operations against Ghuznee and Cabal " ; and yet his proclamation made it appear to be the object of the war to bear away the gates! Mr. Smith referred to the historians, Gibbon and Elphinstone, to show that the proceeding must have been intended to gratify the Hindoo religious feelings, by restoring the gates of their temple ; but its effect must be equally offensive to the Mahometans, a smaller, but more concentrated portion of the Indian people, and of course to the Mahometans of our Sepoy Regiments. That was proved in the case of the Sepoy who refused, on religions scruples, to accompany a Hindoo procession, and who was tried before a court-martial and ac- quitted. Mr. MANGLES declared that the Mussnlmans hate the British. Government with intense hatred—loathing was not too strong a word—for wresting the Indian provinces from their sway; the feeling was shown in 1832, when a trooper was shot and hanged in chains, for having shot his commanding officer, Captain Wallace ; and the body was obliged to be taken down, because the people regarded it as that of a martyr, and flocked to touch it for the cure of diseases. It was quite a mistake to suppose that the Mussulmans of India were originally indifferent to the invasion of Afghanistan; there was scarcely one of rank or dis- tinction that had not Afghan blood in his veins. Several speakers, among whom was Mr. PLUMPTRE, regarded the proclamation as cal- culated to stay the progress of religion in India. This point was strongly insisted on by Mr. Macsur.er ; who enumerated the cha- racteristics of the Hindoos in their worship—their wild fables, grave errors in physical knowledge, rites fatal to morality, symbols not to be named, suttee, Thuggism sanctioned by its horrid divinity ; all of which had been too much tolerated by the British Government, and even in some instances made the source of' revenue. Gradually, however, a purer system arose : Lord Wellesley abolished the immola- tion of female children ; Lord William Bentinck the suttee ; Lord Glenelg the pilgrim-tax ; and in 1841 the East India Company sent orders to the Governor-General to have nothing to do with the native temples, to make no present to them, and to employ no troops in doing them honour. Lord Ellenborough departed from the neutrality incul- cated: he interfered in the concerns of a idol temple, made a gift to it, and sent troops with his present ; that temple being dedicated to "Siva the Destroyer," and to the most repulsive rites,—" cere- * Mr. Wynn was allowed to deliver his speech Fitting, in consequence of in- firmity in the legs or feet. monies," said Mr. Hum; " which would not do in the present day." Nor was he even a popular divinity : for his temples were supported only by the Brahmins, and owned but small congrega- tion & A proclamation which had excited such agitation in India, said Mr. SMITH, such condemnation in England, and such mockery in Europe, proved Lord Ellenborough's incapacity for his office. He should like to know whether the Directors did not await the arrival of the next mail in extreme nervousness : could they answer the general cry, " What next ?" Had Lord Ellenborough been his brother, Mr. MACAULAY remarked, Lord Auckland could not have used more assiduity to leave him every advantage on assuming the functions which devolved upon him : the requital of Lord Ellenborough was the pro- clamation of the 1st October, stigmatizing Lord Auckland in his ab- sence, and, moreover, violating official decency and that state unity which is so necessary to the good government of such distant and ex- tensive possessions. The date was even falsified, to correspond with Lord Auckland's proclamation of the 1st October 1838; for Lord Auckland could not know on the 1st of October that the prisoners were safe. [Mr. boon said that he received official information on the 4th.] Such a method of procuring a paltry triumph by the contrast, exhibited a mind and temper utterly unfitted for the high responsibility of his government. For the purpose of that paltry attack on Lord Auckland, he even incurred the liability of the reproach that he had disregarded the fate of the prisoners. Were the present Go- vernment prepared to carry out the proclamation—to sanction the expectation of the Hindoos that there was to be a triumph for them, and that they were to be governed on Brahminieal principles? did they mean to authorize the restoration of the temple of Somnath? or rather, would not the gates be laid aside, and the gratification of the Hindoos be succeeded by disappointment. For the first time in history, the natives were beginning to laugh at a Governor-General. They ac- knowledged and respected the plainness and solidity of the English character ; and though they bowed in the streets of Calcutta to the ostentation of a nabob, with a beard to his waist, turban, and jewels of paste, they would have thought Sir Charles Metcalfe out of his wits had they met him in the same guise. Nor was the proclamation a real Imitation of Eastern style ; it was rather an imitation of the trashy addresses issued by the French Directory during the Revolution. It afforded, too, a very serious indication of the relation in which Lord Ellenborough stood to the civil service of India. It never could have had the approval of Mr. Maddock, by whom it was counter- signed ; and it was inexplicable, except on the assumption that the Governor-General, distant from his Council at Calcutta, had no one near him entitled to offer him advice. If the Directors would not recall him, at least let them send out oat orders for him to go back to his Council; it was something to interpose the delay even of twenty-four hours between the conception of an absurdity and its execution. Lord PALMERSTON applied himself to combating special points raised in the defence by Ministerial speakers; Lord Joan RUSSELL to proving that the military leaders in Afghanistan had the merit of the operations in that country ; and he wound up the attack by declaring, that Lord Ellenborough would relieve this country from a great difficulty, and India from a great peril, if he retired.

The defence was opened by Mr. EMERSON TENNENT with proofs that the Mahometan, as well as the Hindoo and Sikh population of India, were neither oblivious of the Somnath gates and their rape by Mahmoud the Ghuznivide, eight centuries ago, nor indifferent to the triumph of their recovery. The recollection had been preserved in the oral traditions and popular legends of the country : the twelfth expe- dition of Mahmoud, which endured for two or three years of plunder and warfare, was regarded as the most fearful event in the annals of India ; it was celebrated in the poems of Ferdousi, sung in the verses of Sadi, and narrated by Ferishtu, the historian of the Mussulman Princes of India; Mahmoud and his successors were the scourges of the Mussulman Princes and Mussulman people of India ; and Runjeet Singh, the ambitions chief of the Sikhs, demanded the restoration of the trophy, in the same negotiation with Shah Soojah that treated of the maintenance of armies, the surrender of cities, and the exchange of provinces. That application of Runjeet Singh suggested to Lord Ellenborough an act soothing to the vanity and sympathies of the Indians. The removal of the trophy also enabled the Governor- General to record in Afghanistan the presence of a victorious army, without stain to the British reputation for humanity. Much of the prejudice against the proclamation arose from an error of the transcriber or translator, who called it the temple of Juggernaut, whereas it was dedicated to Siva: the error arose from Runjeet Singh's calling it the temple of Junaghur, the district in which it was situate,—an expression which helped to show that Runjeet Singh, neither a Mussulman nor a Hindoo, but a Sikh, in designating the gates, not by the name of an idol or a temple, but by that of a province of Hindostan, was eager to procure their restoration, not as a religious but as a purely national trophy. And the composition of the military escort, which consisted of all religions classes, proved that the Governor-General did not re- gard the procession as religious ; for the military parade would have been positively illegal had it been connected with the religious observ- ances of the people. [Mr. MACAULAY remarked, that the argument, that the proceeding was impossible because it was improper, assumed for its basis that Lord Ellenborough could not do wrong!] The very wording of the proclamation, which announced the approach of the "glorious trophy" of "successful war," "so long the memorial of subjection to the Afghans," proved that the whole pageant was, not an offering to an idolatrous temple, but a triumph over a vanquished enemy. The gravamen of the charge, however, seemed less the matter than the style of the proclamation : but it must not be judged by Eng- lish standards, having been addressed not to the British but to Hindoos, and promulgated not in English but in Hindee. Mr. Teunent gave two extracts of native state papers, to illustrate the prevailing style : the first was addressed by Dost Mahomet to Lord Auckland, congratu- lating him on his arrival in 1836— " As I have been long attached to the British Government by the ties of friendship and affection, the late intelligence of your Lordship's arrival, en- lightening with your presence the seat of government, and diffusing over Dm- dostan the brightness of your countenance, has afforded me extreme gratifies- cation and the field of my hopes, which had before been chilled by the cold blast of the times, has, hy the happy tidings of your Lordship's arrival, become the envy of the garden of Paradise. I hope your Lordship will regard me and my country as your own. Whatever directions your Lordship may be pleased issue ssue for the government of this country, I will act accordingly." The next was from Runjeet Singh, in 1831, thanking the British Minister for a present of dray-horses, sent by Sir Alexander Burnes : it acknowledged the receipt of a letter, "every letter of which is a new-blown rose on the branch of Regard, every word a blooming fruit on the tree of Esteem," and the arrival of the horses, "of alpine form and elephantine stature "— " These presents, owing to the care of the above gentlemen, have arrived by way of the river Sinde in perfect safety, and have been delivered to me, toge- ther with your Excellency's letter, which breathes the spirit of friendship, by that nightingale of the garden of eloquence, that bird of the winged words of meet discourse, Mr. Burnes; and the receipt of them has caused a thousand emotions of pleasure and delight to arise in my breast." • • • "These animals, in beauty, stature, and disposition, surpass the horses of every city and every country in the world. On beholding their shoes, the new moon turned pale with envy, and nearly disappeared from the sky. Such horses the eye of the sun has never before beheld in his course through the universe. Unable to bestow upon them in writing the praises that they merit, I am compelled to throw the reins on the neck of the steed of description and relinquish the pur- suit." (Much laughter during the reading of these extracts.) Should Lord Ellenborough, communicating with a people accustomed to such a style of diction, have delivered himself in the cold and homely phraseology of an indent for stationary or a gazette announcement ; or sent the gates to the Gnicowar of Guzerat "with the compliments of the Governor-General " ? Mr. Tennant had never heard Lord Liver- pool condemned as an abettor of Romanism for that on the dispersion of the Louvre he had sanctioned the restoration of the madonnas and virgins to the cathedrals and churches of Italy ; and he firmly believed that the act of Lord Ellenborough was equally unconnected with a single feeling of partiality or of deference for the superstitions of the Hindoos. He saw the animus of the motion, in the vain attempt to palliate the policy of the late Governor-General by impugn- ing the policy of his successor; and in the denunciations begun by Lord Palmerston last session in his place, and continued for months in the press: the Opposition discovered something distasteful to them in the details, and found it convenient to forget his months of vigilance and toil near the seat of war. Mr. boo declared that he saw symptoms of reaction in public opinion' to rebel against that ungenerous attempt to hunt down a distinguished public servant ; and he pointed out that the opponents of Lord Ellenborough sought their arguments not in existing circumstances and facts, but in the historical researches of Gibbon and others. Mr. Escorr entered into a comparison of dates, to show how Mr. Vernon Smith, who had given notice of his motion on the fixst night of the session, had repeatedly shifted his notice, so as to come after that of Mr. Roebuck, announced at the same time but often de- ferred; they allowed the Government to screen the delinquency of the Whig Governor-General, by resisting Mr. Roebuck's motion ; their gratitude evaporated in one little week ; and then they came down with the trumpery story about the rotten gates of Somnath—not daring to pronounce a plain and intelligible censure, by naming the recal of Lord Ellenborough. Lord STANLEY afterwards followed up this charge of picking out small faults : his twenty years' Parliamentary experience did not enable him to recollect a time when such great events occurred in India as within the last three years ; yet he never knew the party opposite so studiously to abstain from touching upon the great features of the case, and dwelling pertinaciously on small items of the account, to inflict censure on an individual- " What have we seen occurring in India for the last two years? It was ad- mitted by the late Governor- General of India, that the British power in India had been shaken to its foundation. We hear nothing now from the noble Lord, the Member for Tiverton. Last year the noble Lord was loud in his threats of impeaching the Government for daring to withdraw from the last scene of our triumphs, for ahandonieg the large inlet which was just ready to be opened up to our commerce. We have withdrawn from our advanced posi- tion; we have sacrificed our commercial advantages; we have retired from the banks of the Indus; we have abandoned all the day-dreams, all the visions of glory and conquest and possession, which possessed the mind of the noble Lord: and, I now ask of honourable Members opposite, whether any of them will im- peach us for having done so ; or whether they will not rather sanction, by their consent, our tacit condemnation of the line of policy which was proposed to be pursued by the noble Lord ?"

Lord Sanley did not concur in Mr. Tennent's defence of the pro- clamation, which was "too boastful and too pompous "; and he did not think it judicious to abandon the open, frank, plain style of English state-papers, without acquiring the ornaments attempted : but he ob- jected to the extreme ingratitude of casting censure upon one to whose exertions the country was so much indebted.

Sir ROBERT PEEL spoke of the proclamation in the same sense. He denied the compromise which had been imputed, and said that he op- posed Mr. Roebuck's motion solely on the ground of the public interest. With respect to the contemplated withdrawal of the troops, which formed one of the charges against Lord Ellenborough, Lord Auckland needed defence on the same point-

" At the close of the session last year, in that boastful and magniloquent tone which he so much reprehends in Lord Ellenborough's proclamations, the

noble Lord (Palmerston) triumphantly asked, Who is the man who contem- plated retirement from Afghanistan ? ' I contented myself by saying, 'I could tell you ' ; but I said no more, because I was afraid that a premature declara- tion might compromise national interests and the safety of British troops.

But then, when the noble Lord was charging with disgrace and cowardice any Governor-General who could contemplate retirement from Afghanistan, I was

in possession of a letter from his own Governor-General, dated the 3d Decem- ber 1841, in which occurs the following passage "—[And here Sir Robert read extracts from the despatch by Lord Auckland, dated the 3d December 1841, in which, on learning the insurrection in Cabal, he distinctly anticipated the total withdrawal of the troops, should the military possession of the city be lost.]

Did Lord Durham never issue a proclamation of which hisGovernment disapproved? But then, they argued that a single error must be passed over. Be it so; and what were the circumstances under which Lord Ellenborough arrived in India?— " You say that you are continually occupied in asking the question, What next ?' in connexion with Lord Ellenborough's acts. That was the sole occu- pation of Lord Ellenborough for four or five months after he reached India; and that was your doing. Be landed at Madras on the 15th April, in full de- pendence upon your statements of the condition of that country—in full depen- dence upon the information furnished him by his predecessors in office. lie landed, and the first thing he hears is that there is an insurrection at Cabal ; that the representatives of her Majesty, Sir William M•Naghten and Sir A:exander Burnes, have been murdered; and that there are strong doubts entertained of the safety of the British army in Afghanistan. What next ? He proceeds to Calcutta ; and what does he hear there ? He there hears for the first time of the order issued by his predecessor in the government to evacuate Afghanistan with as little discredit as possible. He then repairs to Benares : and what next ? At Benares he hears the tremendous news that not only had we lost all military power in Afghanistan, but that the spirit of the native army have been so weakened and depressed as to render its recovery almost impossible. At Benares he bears the facts which caused Major-General Pollock to write this letter to Captain Macgregor—t Sir Robert Peel here read the note dated 12th March 1842, which described General Pollock's helpless condition in Pesfiawur, unable to advance to the relief of General Sale, because he wanted reinforcements, and because four regiments of Native troops were in a state of panic and consequent disaffection.j—W hat next? On the 17th April he hears of the failure of General England in the Bolan Pass. What next ? He hears that Ghuanee has fallen; that it is no longer in our posses- sion ; that the barony of Gin:race has no longer any territorial connexion with the title. These were the questions that Lord Ellenborough had to ask from day to day; these are the questions that he had to consider during a period of four or five months, daily and hourly."

The Premier closed his speech by remarking, that it would give a ten times more fatal blow to religion than any thing in the injudicioult.,_ proclamation, if party hostility to Lord Ellenborough were cloaked -""••■ under that sacred garb.

Some admissions made by Opposition Members may be classed as telling for the Ministerial side. Thus, Lord JOHN RerssEm. admitted, that since he had read the papers, he thought the withdrawal of the troops was a wise measure : if he censured the policy of that measure, he censured Lord Auckland. Mr. HUME brought strong evidence that the Somnath proclamation does not bear a religious character in the estimation of the Native Indians— A Hindoo of high caste, now in this country, the Vakeel of the Rajah of Sattara, had written to him a letter, in which he stated—. It appears to me that the restoration of the gates of Somnath could have no reference either to the support or degradation of any religious faith. To restore the gates to their original purpose, is impracticable by the tenets of the 'Endo° religion. Their doctrine is, that any thing when in contact with a dead body, or any thing belonging to it, whether tomb or garment, is utterly contaminated and unfit for religious purposes. In my opinion, therefore, the proclamation must have been intended to gratify the feelings of the Hindoo portion of our army, by removing a stain which the Western portion of India had long felt oppres- sive. In fact, be believed that the Governor-General by this means conci- liated the feelings of the Hindoo soldiery on their return from those scenes of death and disaster in which they bad behaved so well, and where thousands of their fellow-countrymen had fallen. I hope that this intention of Lord Ellen- borough to conciliate the Princes of India will extend to my unfortunate master."

Among the notabilia of the debate, was Mr. Holies account of the inscription on Lord Ellenborough's seal ; it being the custom of the Governor-Generals of India to assume what title they please on entering office— The inscription began, "The cream of Princes, high in dignity, Privy Conn- cillor to her Gracious Majesty the Queen of England, whose port resembled the planet Saturn, Edward, Lord Ellenborough, Guardian and Governor of the provinces in India belonging to England "; and so it went on.

The division took place between one and two o'clock on Friday morning. The motion was negatived, by 242 to 157.

The subject-matter of the debate in the House of Lords was some- what more extensive ; the debate less so, for their Lordships kept a better eye upon the clock. Indeed, some amusement was created when Lord Fitzgerald's official zeal was leading him into too great length, by the Duke of Wellington's exclaiming, " Time, time I "—which brought down his colleague in a trice ; and it seems to have cut short succeed- ing speakers. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE moved the following re- solution— " That this House has seen with regret and disapprobation the proclamation of the Governor-General of India, dated the 1st October last, and his letter to the princes, chiefs, (and people of India, of the 16th November ; because those papers may tend to mislead the native population with respect to the motives and conduct of the British Government in India, may excite religious dissen- sions, may be construed into a direct countenance of gross superstition, and are calculated to introduce the practice, hitherto unknown to our Indian ad- ministration, of publicly commenting and reflecting upon the previous acts and policy of the Government, thereby interfering with that conviction of permanence and stability which is essential to the interests of the British empire in India." The Marquis condemned the proclamation rof the 1st October, be- cause two-thirds of it consisted of censure of Lord Auckland ; and he denied a Governor-General's right publicly to canvass the conduct of his predecessor. It was rumoured, indeed, that great part of the pro- clamation was copied from a letter by the Duke of Wellington : but the Duke would sooner have cut off his right hand than have published his opinions in such a proclamation. Lord Ellenborough, however, seemed to labour under the "delusion," "partial insanity," or "monomania," that the office of Governor-General is handed from one party to another, to be exercised for the peculiar renown of the individual. Very differ- ent was the conduct of Lord Cornwallis, who was sent out as the suc- cessor of Lord Wellesley, to terminate or to restrict hostilities, and who expressed sentiments similar to those of Lord Ellenborough's proclama- tion; but then, he did not make them known to the whole of Asia— they were addressed to the Secret Committee of the Board of Directors of the East India Company. Lord Cornwallis died, and his policy was carried out by Sir George Barlow : but no such proclamation emanated from him. What could be its effect upon our own subjects in India, or upon neighbouring nations, but to discourage our friends and en- courage our enemies ; and to foster that relaxation of military discipline which was said to be exhibited in the free opinions expressed by officers of their superiors? Lord Clanricarde proceeded to attack the Somnath proclamation, somewhat after the fashion of Members in the other House; and be stated, that Lord Ellenborough was so proud of it that he sent translated copies to Paris, that it might be known throughout all Europe as well as Asia. The Earl of CLARENDON said that Lord Ellenborough had become so elated with his position as to issue a pro- clamation that had no parallel since the time of Nebuchadnezzar. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was the other principal assailant.

The Duke of WELLINGTON rose after the Marquis of Clanricarde ; and began his defence of Lord Ellenborough by complaining, that the Marquis had framed a kind of "cumulative resolution "—that is to say, it led to a discussion on one resolution with respect to two papers on totally distinct subjects. He denied that the case of Lord Corn- wallis was in point : for Lord Ellenborough's predecessor had issued a proclamation stating, for the information of India and the world at large, the circumstances under which operations were commenced ;

and he thought it was right in Lord Ellenborough to make known the

existing state of the case, in what form he found the arrangements, and how he should provide permanently for the defence of the vast domi- nions under his government. It must be remembered, that British India and the Afghans were not the only parties to be informed ; but there were also the Sikhs who were concerned in the military arrange- ments. And he asked, whether there was any thing in that proclama- tion but what was strictly true and strictly the fact ? The disasters to which it referred were military disasters. Lord Clanricarde had referred to the Duke as giving opinions to Lord Ellenborough: now he had done so, but he had given none which could be the foundation of any thing in the proclamation. Yet he entirely concurred in it ; and he could not help saying, without attaching blame to Lord Auckland, that in the course of those operations, from first to last, grievous errors had been committed— The first error was attributable to the gentleman who fell a victim very much owing to his own errors (Sir William Macnaghten) : it was the formation of Shah Soojah's army. The army was partly English and partly Hindoo ; and upon it devolved the maintenance of the whole system of Government, including the collection of the revenue. It had consequently become necessary to support the army with some of the Company's troops, and in an doing to violate a rule of the utmost importance in the administration of Indian affairs—that the Company's European troops should never be employed in the collection of revenue. The next error was the manner in which the country bad been oc- cupied. No practicable communications had been kept up with Shikarpore, Candabar, and Ghuznee ; and the passes had been left in the hands of banditti— neither the Kojuck Pass in the South nor the Bolan in the North bad been kept open : but for this, such disasters could never have occurred. But Lord Auckland had nothing to do with this. Again, Sir William Macnaghten was not a military officer ; and that was another error. But the late Governor- General, he thought, was totally mistaken in the arrangements he made with respect to the Resident. The Duke had himself held a similar situation, and knew in what relation he ought to stand to the troops : his business was to see that the troops were provided with necessary resources, but not to command them. This, then, was one of the errors, military errors, to which he believed Lord Ellenborough adverted.

The Duke now came to the other paper ; which, be contended, was nothing more nor less than a song of triumph. He knew pretty well the feeling in the Indian army, and he knew its subordination and discipline to be such, that there was no feeling of distinction as regards religion or caste, any more than in the British army. He did not mean to say that there might not be a Moslem feeling in India : such a feel- ing might be written up, and spoken up, to any extent ; and in that manner such mischief as had been anticipated might be produced. The difficulties in India are greater now than they formerly were, because there is now what is called a "free press," but what he should call a licentious press. With a British population in India of not more than 50,000 persons, including 25,000 troops, bow could the country be go- verned, if the people were excited by observations of this description with respect to their feelings, commencing here and worked up by the press? The Duke went on to argue, that Lord Ellenborough's pro- clamation could not have been meant to encourage idolatry ; resting. much on his circular to the clergy, desiring them to offer thanks to God for a supply of rain, &c. Lord AUCKLAND interposed the brief explanation, that Sir William Macnaghten did not command the troops: that gentleman bad no more authority than what for many years had been given to the Political Agent in that country. The other defenders of Lord Ellenborough were Lord COLCHES- TER, Lord FITZGERALD, and Lord BROUGHAM. Lord FITZGERALD said that a private letter had been written to him by Lord Ellenborough, stating what pains he had taken to guard against misconception in his Somnath proclamation : he had rewritten it three times ; and in another letter he said he hoped he had guarded against objection by a particular class of persons to whom be alluded, including Sir Robert Inglis,—in which he had reckoned without his host. Lord BROUGHAM, in his own pungent and telling manner, exposed the weak points of the assailants ; who abandoned charge after charge, imputing " intention " and dwindling down to "tendency."

Three Bishops spoke : the Bishop of LLANDAFF did not believe that Lord Ellen borough mean to cast any slur on religion ; the Bishop of Noawien thought the Somnath proclamation injurious to religion, but could not concur in the political part of the resolution ; the Bishop of CHICHESTER regarded the proclamation as a simple error in judg- ment; and on those several grounds the Prelates refused their votes to the motion.

On a division, at a quarter to twelve o'clock, the resolution was nega- tived, by 83 to 25.

THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Mr. Fox MAULE drew atten- tion to the petition of the Commission of the General Assembly, alleging two distinct grievances—an invasion of the rights and privileges of the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Scotland by the Civil Courts, and the grievance of patronage. Mr. Maule said that Government bad, he trusted not willingly, adopted misrepresentations as to the claim of the Church ; for in Sir James Graham's letter to the Moderator, it was broadly asserted that the General Assembly not only claimed to be sole judges in all cases spiritual, but maintained that they were "alone" competent to determine what matters were spiritual and what civil. The Church did not claim to be sole judge of what matters were spiritual _and what civil— What the General Assembly and the Church Courts of Scotland claimed was this, that they within their own sphere, as independent courts—indepen- dent as within their own sphere—like as any other courts which existed in Scotland were independent within their own sphere, but without prejudice to the determination of any other court whatsoever—the right of saying, in matters brought before them, what were the limits of the spiritual and of the civil parts of the case.

Mr. Maule traced the title of the Church to the right claimed through the various statutes of Scotland and Great Britain—

In 1567, acts were passed giving the Church of Scotland a status in con-

nexion with the State: the 5th statute of 1567 abolished the mass; the 6th declared the Presbyterian the only true kirk in Scotland; the 7th, which regulated the presentation to benefices, gave the patron, on the refusal of his presentee, by the superintendent minister, right to appeal, first to the Synod of the district, and then to the General Assembly ; " by whom the case being decided, shall take end as they decern and declare." The 12th statute of the same Parliament declared, that " there is no other kirk than is presently, by the favour of God, established within this realm ; and that there be no other jurisdiction ecclesiastical acknowledged within this realm other than that which is or shall be within the same kirk, or that which flows therefrom, concerning the remises." He looked upon this as the original statute by which the eccle- siastical jurisdiction was given to the Church. This statute was renewed by that of 1579 ; and again by that of 1592, sometimes called " the Charter of the Presbyterian Kirk," which distinctly reenacted all the other statutes by which the Church government was previously recognized ; and the statutes of that year declared that the only ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the realm was that which flowed from the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. The act of 1662 re- stored Archbishops and Bishops to Scotland, and at one fell swoop deprived the people of all the benefits for which their ancestors had struggled so nobly; but he quoted its preamble to show, that for the purpose of reestablishing the su- premacy of the King in matters ecclesiastical, it was absolutely necessary to repeal laws and statutes which were then standing in the statute-book, and which gave supremacy in these same matters ecclesiastical, not to the head of the State, but to the Church Courts, and to the Church Courts only. After the Revolution of 1688, the Church presented a Claim of Rights, which made it a condition under which the crown was offered to William and Mary that the ancient Presbyterian church-government should be reenacted ; and in 1690 that government, as ratified and confirmed by the statute of 1592, was restored. The subject of patronage was reserved ; and in 1695 it was settled so as to leave the patronage, not in the hands of the patron, but to a great extent in the hands of the people. At the Union, the Act of Security, which forbade any change in church-government, was embodied in the Treaty of Union.

Mr. Maule quoted opinions of Scotch Judges—Lord President Hope, Lord Moncrieff, and Lord Cockburn—that the settlement thus made could not be altered : Lord President Hope declared that an attempt to do so would be a dissolution of the Union, and that resistance on the part of the people of Scotland in such case could hardly be termed rebellion ; Lord Moncrieff said, that the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Church was "absolutely independent of any other courts, and such as no civil court created by statute for other ends could touch or control "—" this power was fundamental and inherent in the constitution of the king- dom "; and Lord Cockburn asserted the rights of the Church quite as strongly. Sir James Graham said, in his letter, that the question of jurisdiction was a question of law, to be decided in courts of law : but the Institutes of Lord Stair said, it was implied in the office of the Lords of Session that they should interpret all acts of Parliament ; their interpretation, however, to have no other effect but with reference to causes, and without reference to other courts. If the House went into Committee, he should propose, that if the matter could not otherwise be decided, the House should address the Crown, with a view to a declaratory act to define the jurisdiction of the Church, and confine it within its own province.

He now turned to the other grievance, patronage ; with a sketch of the history of Nonintrnsion-

That no minister should be intruded upon the people of a congregation con- trary to their will, was an ancient and standing principle of the Church, asserted in the Book of Discipline; again in 1592, in 1638, and repeatedly until the act of Anne (reserving patronage) was passed in 1712. That act was surreptitiously hurried through Parliament ; the utmost pains being taken to mislead the public—as when the Reverend Mr. Cumming wrote that it was intended to reconcile the Presbyterians of Scotland to the Hanoverian succes- sion. It remained a dead letter for more than twenty years: in 1726 a forced settlement was attempted, but it was not effected until 1730. In 1736 the principle of Nonintrusion was again asserted in the General Assembly ; but the Presbyterian feeling in the country had grown lukewarm, and the General Assembly of the Church took the lead in attempting forced settlements. At the beginning of the present century the Evangelical spirit revived, and in 1834 the majority of the people became alive to the importance of the sub- ject. In 1833, Sir George Sinclair made a motion in the House of Commons for abolishing the act of Anne; and the opinions uttered by Members for

i

several Northern counties showed that the General Assembly, n passing the Veto Act of 1834, carried with it the general sanction and support- When that act passed into a law of the General Assembly, the Queen's Solicitor- General formed one of that body; it had the approval of the Lord Chancellor of the day ; Sir John Campbell "rejoiced" at its passing; and no member of the Church of Scotland took exception to it.

Mr. Manic could not recognize the "vested right" of patronage; for i was taken away in 1695, and restored without any payment being made ; and therefore he did not see what claim there was for compen- sation. The Church had never been so prosperous or useful as under the working of the act, until the Anchterarder case arose.

The petitioners stated these grievances ; and unless they were re- moved, there would be a secession, not only of the best and most effi- cient ministers of the Church—its chivalry—but of a body to whom he could scarcely attach less importance, the elders of the Church. He reminded the House that the majority in the Church are the Evangeli- cal party ; to prove whose beneficial influence, he mentioned that the annual collections for missionary and the like purposes had risen from 4,8001. in 1834 to 25,000/. in 1842. He did not ask the House for a sweeping act, totally repealing the statute of Anne : be believed the country would be satisfied with a smaller measure, recognizing to its fullest extent the principle of Nonintrusion ; but he did object to Lord Aberdeen's bill, which added to the power of the Church, while it obliged the people to give reasons for rejecting a presentee. The Church's rejection of the power thus offered was the best answer to the aspersions on their character. They only required that men should be fit for the sacred office, and above all for the locality to which they might be nominated. He moved,

"That this House will immediately resolve itself into a Committee, to take into consideration the petition of the Commission of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and the matters therein contained."

Sir JAMCES GRAHAM paid a tribute to the character of the gallant and independent Scottish nation • and admitted that the question must be regarded not with English feelings and prejudices, but upon the prin- ciple of the Union with Scotland. He had studiously avoided contro- versy on the subject until the Convocation of the Scotch Ministers called for a specific answer from Government ; and he disclaimed any intention of giving offence in his letter to the Moderator of the General Assembly. He also solemnly disclaimed, on the part of Govermnent,

the slightest or most remote wish to change the Presbyterian discipline in that country. No church, with its parochial establishments, could be more congenial to the body of the Scotch people ; and upon the whole it never shone with a brighter light than just when this unhappy contro- versy arose. The dominant party in the Church, therefore, were deeply responsible for the consequences of that controversy, and the discord which it produced— Englishmen could hardly understand it ; but he knew that at that moment this great question of schism in the Church of Scotland was tearing society to pieces in the very heart and vitals of the country : it was dividing families, setting father against mother, son against daughter ; and that, pushed to an ex- treme, must have a demoralizing and fatal effect on the peace and happiness of the country. How melancholy, that the Christian religion, which was ushered to earth with the proclamation of bringing peace and good-will towards men, should be made, as it were, the root of bitterness, hatred, and controversy, and should have grafted upon it all the worst passions of our nature !

He adduced proof that he had not misrepresented the claim of the Church in saying that they claimed the exclusive right of pronouncing what was civil and what was spiritual— The memorial addressed by the Convocation to the Queen, dated the 17th November, solemnly declared, " that the government and discipline of Christ's church cannot be carried on, according to his laws and the constitution of his church, subject to the exercise, by any secular tribunal, of such power as has been assumed by the said Court of Session " ; and they refused to submit to the coercion attempted over them in the exercise of their spiritual functions by the same court. No language could be more explicit : they said, that if any question should arise, partly of a civil and partly of a spiritual character, and the Civil Courts took part in its consideration, the whole spiritual power of the Church Courts was at once prostrated beneath the civil power. The General Assembly itself declared, immediately after the decision in the Audi- terarder case, that the Court of Session had invaded the jurisdiction of the Courts of the Church, and had illegally attempted to coerce the Church Courts in the exercise of their purely spiritual functions. And in the same paper they protested, "That all and whatsoever acts of the Parliament of Great Britain, passed without the consent of this Church and nation, in alteration of or derogation to the aforesaid government, discipline, right, and privileges of this Church," "as also, all and whatsoever sentences of courts in contra- vention of the same government, discipline, right, and privileges, are and shall be in themselves void and null, and of no legal force or effect." Could any doubt then arise as to what was the claim which was set up ? First, they said that all decisions of the Courts of Law on the statutes, in cases where spiritual matters were concerned, though involving civil rights, were invalid; and then, when they came to the protest, they declared that whatever acts the Parliament bad passed were void and of no effect, as being passed without the consent of the Church and the nation."

But the claim put by Mr. Maule, though different in phrase, was identically the same as what Sir James Graham had stated. Mr. Maule allowed the claim to be, that the Church should decide, when any matter was brought before them, whether it were spiritual or not : but suppose a dispute arose as to the limits of the authority—what was to determine it ? He did not deny to a certain extent the independence of the Church of Scotland : but it had joined the State upon certain fixed terms,—that they should have no power of modifying or changing the tenets of the Church, as set forth in the Confession of Faith, which was embodied in the Act of Union; and that they should continue to be the instructor of the people in the faith so fixed by act of Parliament ; the Church being thus bound even with respect to spiritual matters. The majority of the Assembly contended for certain complete and co- ordinate jurisdictions : but the real question was, when a dispute arose between coordinate jurisdictions, who should decide in the last resort. There were various illustrations of these coOrdinate jurisdictions—as the courts of fiscal authority to decide fiscal questions, and the Court of Justiciary to decide on criminal cases. But those were not coordinate jurisdictions—they were the delegation of subdivided judicial powers. In each of these cases there was a limitation as to the extent and pro- vince of the jurisdiction : so was it with the power of the Church, in the statute which established and regulated that Church— The point at issue was, a dispute as to the interpretation to be put upon the statute of Anne : two readings had been given to the same expression, and the question was, "Should a qualified minister be taken on trial or not ? " The Auchterarder Presbytery had adopted the interpretation of the Church Court, and had rejected the presentee. The Strathbogie .Presbytery, interpreting the same statute, acting on the same authority, had come to an opposite conclusion, and had taken the presentee on trial, in conformity with the decision of the Civil Court.

The ease had been carried by appeal to the House of Lords, the last resort in questions ofjudisdiction and disputed law ; and by that tribunal it was decided. He conceded that the Church had jurisdiction in matters ecclesiastical; but the question recurred,what is ecclesiastical and what is civil ? Lord Gullies, than whom there could not be a higher authority, had said-

" The 'General Assembly can legislate on matters ecclesiastical, and on every- thing which has been the subject of a resolution of the Assembly ; but it cannot Convert affairs of the state into matters ecele,iastical."

And Lord Corehouse had said, that from the Reformation to the date of the Veto Act, he could discover no trace or authority for the doc- trine, that the dissent of the Congregation without reasons assigned was sufficient for the rejection of the presentee : but he added, that no one could be admitted against whom good reasons could be urged. That, Sir James Graham maintained, was the law of Scotland. From the spirit which actuated the General Assembly, it was obvious that no act of Parliament would be accepted by that body in settlement of the question : they said that any act of Parliament passed without the consent of the Church would be null and void. Neither from Mr. Fox Manle's speech nor from a private conversation with Mr. Rutherford could he gather what course Mr. Maule meant to pursue if the House went into Committee. With reference to the abolition of patronage, which deeply involved the rights of the Crown, it was impossible for any Member to introduce a bill without the consent of the Crown : that consent he would not advise ; and as it was desirable that all suspense on the matter should be removed, he should best consult his duty by resisting the motion.

Mr. RUTHERFORD argued, that the question was, not whether it was wise that there should be coordinate jurisdictions in Scotland, but whe- ther they existed ; which he maintained, and as that is the case the ob- ject must be to see that their boundaries are properly kept. The pre- sent confusion is injurious not only to the Church, but to the Courts of Lew, whose decrees had been treated with contumely and contempt in

hundreds of cases. By interdicting Presbyteries from entertaining charges ofimutorality against particular pastors, the Court of Session had stepped beyond its province to interfere with matters purely eccle- siastical ; and on the other hand, he admitted that it would have been better had the Church withdrawn the Veto Act after the decision of the House of Lords on the Auchterarder case. He endeavoured to convince the House of the disastrous consequences which would ensue if they did not interfere.

Mr. Cow:mous: combated the claim of the Church, as unconstitutional ; and he expressed a belief that many Nonintrusionists had opposed Lord Aberdeeq's bill from not sufficiently understanding the state of the case.

Mr. P. M. STEWART contrasted Mr. Colquhoun's avowal with oppo- site opinions which he had formerly expressed. He took some pains to make the House perceive that the question was peculiar, and not easily intelligible by Englishmen. A Conservative M.P. had written to Sir George Sinclair that the whole question addled his brain. The Reforma- tion in England originated with a Monarch, and the Anglican Church assumed a Monarchical character : the Reformation in Scotland origi- nated with the people, and the Church assumed a Democratic form. On these premises, he counselled those Members who did not understana---.......6. the subject to abstain from voting, or to vote with a majority of Scotch Members.

At this point an adjournment took place.

In resuming the debate on Wednesday, Mr. Cuuseumen BRUCE stepped forward as the representative of the Moderate party in the Church of Scotland, and opposed the motion, because it would tend rather to exasperate than to allay religious dissension. The Church claimed to be the sole interpreter of what was within their jurisdiction. Dr. Candlish stated, on the 4th February last, that no mere Nonintrusion or Anti-Patronage measure would put the Church right, unless it secured to the Church a jurisdiction to determine for itself, and to regulate its own conduct in spiritual matters, and as to what fell within its own jurisdiction, leaving to the Court of Session to determine all civil matters. Mr. Bruce contended, that no claim to spiritual power not conceded by the State could be good. If the claims of the Church were granted, a tyranny would be established more intolerable than that of Rome. As to the necessity of the case, he maintained that the Church possesses, by the existing law, the power of preventing the in- trusion of improper presentees: the patron can only choose from one class of persons—the licentiates or probationists of the Church ; and if the Presbytery had been at first deceived in the character of the person whom they had admitted to that class, the presentee is taken on trial and examined as to matters of doctrine, morals, and learning; objections are invited, and if they are established the presentee is rejected. It was proposed to transfer the choice of the candidate, front the Presby- tery, who are now responsible, not to the parishioners, but to such heads of families as may be communicants : now the clergy alone have the power of admitting to the sacrament or excluding from it ; and thus they may diminish or increase the number of those who are to exercise the Veto—too great a power to intrust to the clergy. An instance of what might take place was what occurred at Dalgleish on the retire- ment of Mr. Mackintosh : Sir James Graham appointed a gentleman of high character ; but in a parish of 1,700 souls there were only ten com- municants, and six of those, many of whom could not write their names, vetoed the gentleman. Mr. Bruce denied that the people of Scotland were in favour of the change : ninety-nine in a hundred proprietors of land and the majority of the middle class were adverse ; and all the periodical press, excepting five or six papers established by the domi- nant party in the Church, were opposed to the Veto. The greatest delusion had been practised to influence the poorer classes : one minister, who called upon his parishioners to sign a petition, told them that one party advocated the cause of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the other the cause of Satan ; another minister " mentioned a report," that the King of the French was in correspondence with Queen Victoria for the purpose of bringing back the rope as the head of the religion of England ! If the Church took proper steps, and rescinded the Veto- law, some good might be done : but he exhorted the Government, in any settlement, to extricate from their difficulties those members of the Established Church who had given by their conduct a valuable example of obedience to the existing law.

Sir GEORGE GREY contended at some length, that the House was bound to go into Committee to consider a practical measure, which he assumed Mr. Maule to contemplate; and to the principle of Nonintru- sion he was prepared to give his cordial support, as a member of Sir George Sinclair's Committee in 1834.

Mr. JAMES STUART WORTLEY entreated the Government not to believe that the urgency of the danger was overrated. He hoped that something might be devised to induce the Church to abandon the high ground that it bad taken ; and while he could not vote for the motion and its ulterior objects, he hoped, that if the Government did not under- take the task, some Member would introduce a bill to settle the dis- puted questions ; though he admitted the difficulty of doing so.

Sir ANDREW LEITH HAY supported the motion, and advocated secu- ring to the people a voice in the selection of their ministers.

Mr. Ben= COCHRANE expressed his entire concurrence in the views of Sir James Graham's letter ; and closed some general remarks by saying, that if the Scottish people were to be overridden by an eccle- siastical power worse than that which ever existed at Rome, he should prefer it to come with all the pride and pomp of the Romish hierarchy—. he would prefer the arrogance of Rome to the hypocrisy of the Kirk. He did not believe in the threat that the great body of ministers would secede from the Church ; and as to the few, he would see them leave it with pleasure, because he thought they would only make themselves contemptible.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL noticed the foregoing expressions, to avow his respect for the Church of Scotland, and the conscientious spirit by which the Nonintrusion party were actuated, and his regret at the very great calamity which seemed impending over the Northern part of the land. But neither Mr. Fox Maule nor Mr. Rutherford had clearly indicated to his mind the course to be pursued in this embarrassed and difficult state of circumstances. He could see no advantage in going into Committee to pass mere abstract resolutions, asserting something 1690. If such were the case, the act of 1712 might be entirely set aside ; the SUPPLY : GRIEVANCES: NAVY AND ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.

He could not conceive the connexion between Church and State car- disappointed that the judgment of the House of Lords in the Auch- liament by petition and by reason. Lord John expressed himself ad- to make their objections, to be judged by the Presbytery. Probably must be remembered that a large party in Scotland all along differed with the Church in its interpretation of the constitution. Still it was pressed with that feeling, that he had contemplated moving, as an of Mr. Ferrand in Parliament. He moved that Mr. Clements be the destruction of the Church of Scotland ; but he would not take upon called to the bar of the House on Monday next. Sir JAMES Gassaaat himself to embarrass Ministers by proposing a thing which might be

thought Mr. Clements might, by a stretch of the doctrine of privilege, so difficult of accomplishment. He trusted, however, that Sir Robert

be deemed to have acted irregularly iu not having withdrawn while this Peel would let fall nothing that would prevent the hope that the cala- resolution was passed ; but, "without attaching too much credit to the mity might be averted.

Nonintrusion was not new, going back to ancient records ; and he aver- red that the Church called upon Parliament to declare what ought to be law.

show that the claim of the Church could not be conceded without which showed a reduction of 258,129/. Had it not been for the fire in abandoning the supremacy of the law and of the acts of Parlbment the Tower of London, the reduction would have been greater by over all individuals and bodies, ecclesiastical and civil. If the Church 100,0001.: but, as it was, the gross diminution under this head, since Cen-•,. -!leged undue interference from the Civil Courts, the question the present Ministers had been in office, was 300,0001. He stated that was one for the judgment of the House of Lords. He did not ees,..::, the mar..7.4.- ' - ‘‘" !---erovt,d Ere arms was proceeding at the rate of however, of seeing the disputes settled, without detriment to the rights 1,000 per week ; it could be increased...0 2,00'.7 ,... v-eek, or, on an

• of patrons, and yet satisfactorily to the friends of the Church. emergency, even to 1,000 a day. Sir ROBERT PEEL formally stated his sense of the importance of the The several votes were agreed to. crisis, and of the usefulness of the Church ; but he thought that a con- WORKHOUSE SEPARATION OF THE SEXES.

currence in the motion would unsettle the authorities and constitution Lord TEYNHAM made his debut in the House of Lords on Tuesday, in Scotland. There was a Church established by law, at variance with moving resolutions on the separation of the sexes in workhouses. lie the law and interrupting its operation : such a state of things could not introduced them in a speech of some length, and much earnestness ; re- be provided for by law ; and to go into Committee for the purpose of peating many of the usual arguments against the practical divorce of making some proposal, either falling short of the claims of the Church husband and wife and the separation of parent and child ; the source or at variance with them, would be to countenance a delusion. The of immorality, and a condition of relief most unjust to those who can question was, were the claims preferred such as the House of Commons be charged neither with immorality nor ungodliness in the charge of ought to entertain ; and on that ground be refused his assent to the mo- their own offspring. The want of classification in workhouses—the tion. He reserved to himself, however, the entire power of legislating mixing of the aged, the weak, and the virtuous, with the robust, the upon principles which he thought consistent with the constitution and rude, and the vicious—is another fearful evil. He told how he had with the principles of English jurisprudence; and the temper with once gone into a cottage and found a woman weeping : she feared that which the subject had been debated afforded a glimmering of hope. Sir her husband, who loved his children, would go out of his mind from Robert dissented from the proposition of the Church for the abolition the agony he suffered at the idea of going into a workhouse. If do of patronage : as to the question of right, patronage had been recognized mestic affection had: been diminished and vice disseminated, the law from the earliest times, and the statute passed in 1567 preserved it ; was to be thanked for it. He moved, and as to the policy, Lord Moncrieff, the author of the Veto Act, had "First, That it is the opinion of this House, that the separation of man and shown objections to intrusting the presentation either to the Birk- Ses- wife, of parents and children, which takes place in the Union Workhouses, is an sion, the Heritors, or the Congregation. "I never," said Sir Robert Peel, exceeding evil, and the cause of evils. Second, That its abolition ought there- " could assent to the proposal that the communicants, or heads of fami- fore to be forthwith sought. Third, That by a judicious administration of out- lies, or any description of people, should have the absolute right, by a door relief, the use of the workhouse for married paupers, except for casual majority, of electing the ministers of the Church." With respect to the poor and cases of exigency, might be and ought to be abolished." other part of the subject, be held it to be impossible to define before- The Duke of WELLINGTON with a compliment to the young Peer's band the bounds to which ecclesiastical and civil jurisdiction should eloquence, remarked that he WELLINGTON, left the House wholly in the dark as extend; and if the decisions of the House of Lords were not to be to the manner of carrying out his propositioa : and he seemed not to be obeyed, there was an end of connexion between Church and State, and aware of all the circumstances attending the matters to which he had of security for the civil power itiulf. The Church had even proceeded called attention. For instance, what he called a "divorce" was no separn- to inflict grievous penalties for obedience to the law ; a power not ex- non at all, except so far asregards the sexes : the parties reside under the ceeded by any to which the Church of Rome laid claim before the Re- same roof, and see each other at all hours of the day. Their Lordshir, respecting the jurisdiction of the Church, without touching upon its re- formation. Sir Robert Peel drew a distinction between opinions ex-

lotions with the State. He looked to the circumstances under which the pressed in favour of the Veto Act before and after the decision of the claim to exclusive jurisdiction had grown up ; and he construed the Lords ; since which, with the opposition of the Church to that decision, statutes on which it had been founded, to imply jurisdiction in spiritual the question had assumed a new phase. Be would make almost any matters only so long as the acts. connected with them were confined to concession to restore tranquillity ; but such claims, if conceded, would spiritual concerns. He illustrated his meaning by reference to the case be unlimited in their extent—they could not be confined to the Church of Dr. Sacheverel— of Scotland. He believed that, consistently with Presbyterian disci-

i* " If there be any thing more particular in spiritual and ecclesiastical juris- pline and the ancient claims of the Church, an amicable settlement diction, unquestionably it is in the preaching of the gospel by the ministers of could be effected ; but not in accordance with the present demands of the church. Dr. Sacheverel preached two sermans, one at Derby and one in the Church. He concluded by saying— the city of London, which he asserted to be founded on the gospel. S. far as "Should her Majesty's Government think it necessary to legislate on this those sermons related to matters of doctrine, there was nothing which the question, their measure would be based on the view developed in the communi- cation of Commons, or any civil tribunal, could take any notice of; but they cation made by my right honourable friend near me. I wish most earnestly did contain also political matters, and made certain statements with but to that the impediments to the Veto Act were removed ; but I do not see at the right of resistance, which were thought inconsistent and incompatible with present any prospect of making a satisfactory settlement of that question. My the constitution of this country. Therefore the great leaders of party de- belief is, that there is abroad, both in this country, in Scotland, and in other flounced those sermons ; an impeachment was voted by the House of Commons; countries, after a long series of religious contentions and neglect of the duties and after hearing able arguments in the case, Dr. Sacheverel was sentenced and of religion, a spirit founded upon just views in connexion with these subjects. punished by the judgment of the House of Commons : an incident this which I But I hope that in effecting this object an attempt will not be made to establish mention only to show, that however we may make abstract statements declaring a spiritual or ecclesiastic-1d supremacy above the other tribunals of the country ; certain things to be under civil and certain others to be under ecclesiastical and that, in conjunction with an increased attention to the duties of religion, jurisdiction, you cannot positively lay it down that if the ecclesiastical over- the laws of the country will be maintained. If the House of Commons is pre- steps its powers it shall remain totally beyond Parliamentary authority." peed to depart from those principles upon which the Reformation was founded, He went on to show, that in 1834 the Church fixed conditions on the and which [principles are essential to the maintenance of the civil and religious admission to benefices which were mostly new, at least, from 1692 to liberties of the country. whether it proceeds from the Church of Rome or 1834 nothing like the Veto Act had been the law of the Scotch Church : from the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, nothing but evil would result ; the but to admit that claim would lead to much more— greatest evil of which would be the establishment of religious domination, " If we allow that the Church in 1834 could lay down certain conditions' which would alike endanger the religion of the country and the civil rights of which, because they related to the admission of ministers, should, therefore, be man." binding and effective, we must accede to this further concession, that the Church Mr. MAULE having briefly replied, the House divided; and the mo- might make any other conditions of a similar kind ; that she might, for instance, tion was rejected, by 211 to 76. have established election in the hands of the congregation, contrary the act of act which declared patrons are to have the right of presentation becomes at once On the motion to resume the Committee of Supply on the Navy a dead letter. Therefore I can hardly agree in the assumption, that as to matters Estimates, on Monday, Mr. WALTER moved for an account of sums spiritual and ecclesiastical, even the power of the Church is unbounded and un- expended in out-door relief in 1841 and 1842 ; and he took occasion to limited, without at the same time saying it is entirely in the discretion of the revert to the "dark document," the secret report which he had de- Church to declare whether an act of Parliament shall be rendered really null nouuced on a former evening. He justified his having publicly men-

and void." tioned it, on the score that he did not know how he came by it; and that even if it was originally a confidential communication, none but ried on on such conditions. He attributed all the misfortunes which had dishonourable men could be bound by a confidence the object of which occurred to the maintenance of the Veto Act ; and he had been greatly was, like that report, " infamous, mischievous, and cruel" : detection and exposure were every man's duty. In retaliation for a charge of terarder case had not had more influence. The Church should have having spoken disrespectfully of the Duke of Wellington, he taunted withdrawn the Veto Act, and then have sought her objects from Par- Sir James Graham with having formerly said of Sir Robert Peel and the Duke of Wellington's Governmeet that he had no confidence in it, verse to the principle of the Veto Act, as a bad means of selecting and that it was composed of the very worst materials. Sir JAMES ministers; and to Lord Aberdeen's bill, as giving too great power to Gasizam said he had not heard Mr. Walter's speech, [which some of the the Church ; but he would give the majority of the congregation power reports represent as inaudible,] bathe had no doubt that he should be able to read a report of it in the morning. Mr. Walter had given a definition Mr. Maule intended to propose in Committee resolutions declaring of confidence, and the House perfectly understood his practical appli- what is the ecclesiastical or spiritual power of the Church, and serving cation of it; but Sir James never would imitate it, nor was the new con- es the basis of a law whereby the will of the congregation should be straction of the word generally accepted by the House. He gave a taken as the mode of deciding on the placing of a minister : Lord John partial consent to the motion; but it was withdrawn on a point of could not regard that as a happy mode of settling the question ; and it form.

Mr. FERRAND next interposed. He complained of a breach of pri- vilege committed against himself by Mr. Clements, the Assistant Poor ‘. honourable gentleman's accuracy," and taking his own statement, it oh- Mr. ALEXANDER CAMPBELL argued to prove that the principle Oz viously would not be expedient to call Mr. Clements to the bar. On a division, Mr. Ferrand's motion was rejected by 195 to 6.

The House went into Committee, and several votes were passed.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL entered into an elaborate explanation to Captain BOLDER° then brought forward the Ordnance Estimates ;

especially those of the naval or military professions, were liable to the same separation. And if it was an evil, it was substituted for greater evils—the abuses of the old law ; of which Mr. Pitt, Mr. Whitbread, and Mr. Sturges Bourne were sensible, but failed to remedy. He urged the House not to stultify themselves by agreeing to resolutions which could bind nobody, but to wait until the subject came before them in the Go- vernment measure for the amendment of the Poor-law. He moved that the House do now adjourn. Earl STANHOPE, who supported the motion, alluded to the" execrable paper" which Mr. Walter had recently "dragged from its obscurity," and which proved that the object of the present Poor-law was to prepare the country for having no Poor-law at all. He prophesied that the evils in question, and many others, would very shortly be removed— That removal might be effected by means to which he would not more par- ticularly allude. The signs of the times were written in large legible characters, that he who ran might read. None but those who were wilfully blind could avoid seeing the handwriting on the walL The Duke of WELLINGTON contradicted Lord Stanhope respecting the paper- " The noble earl has referred to a document which has been represented as having formed the basis of the Poor-law Bill. Knowing, as I do, my lords, that no such paper ever existed, I will venture, in this House, to deny the as- sertion altogether. I again repeat that no such document ever existed."

The amendment was carried without a division.

EDUCATION.

The Earl of JERILYN appeared at the bar of the Commons on Wed- nesday, and delivered the following answer by the Queen to the address adopted by the House on the 28th February- " I have received your loyal and dutiful address. The attention of my Go- vernment had been previously directed to the important object of increasing the means of moral and religious education among the working-classes of my people ; and the assurance of your cordial cooperation in measures which I consider so necessary, confirms my hope that this blessing will be secured by legislative enactment." Sir JAMES Osamu( introduced his bill for regulating the employ- ment of children and young persons in factories ; enumerating its chief provisions— The hours of labour for children are to be reduced from 8 to 6i hours a day ; the whole to be performed in the forenoon or in the afternoon. The minimum age of children to be lowered from nine to eight years. At present, the work- time of "young persons," those above thirteen and under eighteen, is limited to 12 hours ; the maximum age of female "young persons" will be raised to twenty-one ; the time of Saturday will be limited to 9 hours. Machinery is to be guarded so as to prevent accidents ; and it is not to he cleaned while in motion. The power of making up for lost time where water-power is used will be limited. Qualified surgeons are to be appointed to attend the several mills of a district. And to his former statement respecting the educational provisions he added the particular, that in all the manufacturing 'districts the children of any parents, whether those children were employed in factories or not, should have the benefits of education at an expense not exceeding 3d. per week.

A subsequent bill would be introduced to extend the law to lace- factories and children employed in printing.

NATURALIZATION OF FOREIGNERS.

Moving the second reading of the Naturalization of Foreigners Bill, on Wednesday, Mr. Hum explained the occasion of the measure. He described:the existing law— No alien can hold land, or any place of trust or emolument under the Crown. By taking out letters patent of denization, a foreigner is permitted to hold land, but neither to inherit it nor to transmit it to his children born prior to his denization. A naturalization bill, which costs from 150/. to 2004 will enable him to hold and bequeath lands, and his children will inherit them; but still he can hold no place of trust or emolument, civil or military, under the Crown; he cannot have a seat in either House of Parliament, or at the Council-board; and if he is a merchant, he cannot obtain the advantages of a British subject in his dealings with other countries, unless he can show that he has resided in this country for seven years from the passing of the act, never having been out of it for more than two months at a time.

Mr. Hatt argued for the policy of freely admitting foreigners to settle here : those who do so are likely to be the most active and intelli- gent in the particular arts. Most of our manufacturing superiority was originally derived from foreign immigrants ; so was that of Holland; and if we are to hold our course of prosperity, under the economical difficulties of the country, it can only be by adapting every part of the machine of society to that increased exertion which it is called upon to make.

Sir JAMES Gemame said that Mr. Hutt had failed to prove any prac- tical inconvenience resulting from the existing law. He maintained that the facilities already afforded for the denization and naturalization

• of foreigners are quite sufficient; he doubted whether under Mr. Hutt's bill the process of naturalization would not be as tardy and expensive as at present ; and he took some objection to its machinery. The experiment tried in the reign of Queen Anne evidently did not meet with the approbation of the country ; and he must say, that he shared the vulgar prejudice that the members of the Legislature should be native-born subjects. He moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months.

The measure was supported by Dr. STOCK, Captain PECHELL, Mr. LABOUCHERE, MY. SMYTHE, MY. EWART ; an dopposed by MY. AGLIONBY, as tending to sow discomfort in many families, and uasettle titles to estates. The amendment was carried without division.

MISCELLANEOUS.

TOWNSHEND PEERAGE. The Committee appointed by the House of Lords to consider the petitions of the Marquis of Townshend and Lord Charles Townshend, against Mr. John Margetts, who had assumed the Marquis's second title, "Earl of Leicester," reported on Monday, that they had searched in vain for precedents ; and that no relief could be given to the petitioners in the case except by means of a private bill. In the House of Commons, on the same night, the Earl of LEICESTER complained that Lord Brougham had taken a partisan view of his case, on an ex park statement; and he asked the House and the country to suspend their judgment. Carsuataa LUNATICS. In reply to Lord Baomanam, on Monday, the LORD Casarce.T.r.on stated, that he was about to put himself in commu- nication with persons likely to possess correct information on the sub- ject of the law relative to criminals labouring under monomania ; and Should that information direct to any practical remedy, the result should be communicated to their Lordships. Lord DENMAN promised the counsel of the Judges ; and Lord CAMPBELL concurred in the general opinion of the Law Lords that some remedy for the existing defects in the law is urgent. THANKS TO THE FORCES IN CHINA. The SPEAKER communicated to the House of Commons, on Monday, a letter from Sir Gordon Bremer, dated Priory Compton, Plymouth, 3d March 1843, gratefully acknow- ledging that which conveyed the thanks of the House to him and the officers and men employed on the coast of China. THE ASHBURTON TREATY. Lord PALMERSTON has postponed his motion for papers respecting the United States treaty, to Tuesday week.