Vrhatto unit rortthiugs iu Varliamtut.

PRINCIPAL BIISINESS OF THE WEEK.

HOUSE op Loans. hfonday, May 22. Scotch Schoolmasters ; Duke of Buceleuch's Question, and Lord Aberdeen's Answer.

Tuesday, May 23. Dangerous Animals ; Lord Lanesborough's Bill thrown out— Common Law Procedure; Lord Chancellor's Bill committed.

Thursday, May 25. Ascension-day ; therefore no sitting. Friday. May 26. Foreign Relations ; Lord Clanricarde's Questions—Railway Regulation ; Committee on Mr. Cardwell's Bill postponed—Manning the Navy ; Sir James Graham's Bill committed—Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill read a third time and passed—Leasing Powers (Ireland) Bill read a third time and passed.

House OP CoMMONS. Monday, May 22. Ways and Means; Mr. Baring's Amend- ment on Exchequer Bonds negatived by 290 to 186—Sugar-duties; Resolutions re- ported—Stamp-acts ; Resolutions reported, and Bill ordered—Customs-duties Bill read a third time and passed. Tliesday, May 23, Middlesex Industrial Schools Bill ; Mr. Mullings's Amendment negatived—Church-rates ; Sir William Clay's Bill brought in and read a first time. Wednesday. May 24. Property Disposal; Mr. Whiteside's Bill; debate on the second reading resumed and again adjourned. Thwaday, May 25. Parliamentary Oaths ; Lord John Russell's Bill thrown out, by 231 to 247. Friday, stay 26. Loss of the Tiger ; Admiral Wakott's Question—The Simoom Transport ; Mr. Macartney's Question—Gun-boats for the Baltic ; Mr. S. Fitzgerald's Question—Russian Blockade ; Mr. Headlam's Question—Vienna Protocol ; Lord Dudley Stuart's Question—Ways and Means ; [Spirit-duties]—Excise-Duties Bill committed—Income-tax Bill committed—Oxford University ; Lord John Russell's

Bill in Committee.

TIME- TABLE.

The Lords.

Hoar of Hour of

Meeting. Adjournment.

Monday Sh . . eh 45m Tuesday Sit . 8k 20m Wednesday . .. No sitting. Thursday No sitting.

Friday Sh .. . 10h 50m

Sittings this Week, 3; Time, 105 53m — this Session. 58; — 138k 2.7m WAYS AND MEANS: Before going into Committee on Monday, Mr. THOMAS BARING made a remark, which was the subject of a preliminary discussion after the House had gone into Committee. He had given notice of an amendment on the report of a resolution already passed respecting the 2,000,0001. Exchequer Bonds. He understood that he could not in the House refer to what passed in Committee, and he would therefore move his amendment in Committee on the remaining resolutions. In the conversation that tools place, Mr. DISRAELI endeavoured to make out that these had been a departure from the understanding with the Opposition ; but Mr. GLAD- STONE showed that while the taxing resolutions were necessarily a matter of form, the Exchequer Bond resolutions had never been placed in that light ; and that he had followed precedent throughout. The resolutions proposed by Mr. Gladstone were in the following terms- " 1. That the Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury be authorized to issue Exchequer Bonds bearing interest at the rate of 3/. 10s. per centum per annum, for any sums not exceeding in the whole 4,000,0001., at any prices and on any terms determined upon by the said Commissioners, such bonds to be paid off at par at the expiration of any period or periods not ex- ceeding six years from the date of such bonds.

"2. That the interest for all such Exchequer Bonds shall be payable half- yearly, and shall be charged upon and issued out of the growing produce of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom. "3. That in case the said Exchequer Bonds be not issued for the full sum

The Commons.

Hour of Hour of

Meeting. Adjournment.

Monday 4k .(ttil th lbm Tuesday 4h , 10h 15m Wednesday Noon 511 55m Thursday 4h .(os) lit 45m Friday 4h .(sn) Oh 15m

Sittings this Week, 5; Time, 42h 25m — this Session. 72; — 4335 47111

EXCHEQUER BONDS.

of 4,000,0001., as hereinbefore mentioned, then the Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury be authorized to issue Exchequer Bills to such amount as, with the totar amount kr which such bonds shall be issued, will make up the whole mum of 4,000,000/. authorized to be raised by these re- solutions."

Mr. Grawraag‘ ha awed the first of these resolutions, Mr. T. Emu:xi; moved his t, as follows- " That it is not at present expedient to authorize any further issue of Exchequer Bonds with the engagement of repayment within the next six years."

In support of this amendment, Mr. Baring undertook to answer the speeel made by Mr. Gladstone when he introduced the subject on a pre- vious night ; and accordingly, at great length, he once more reviewed the measures of last year and the present financial position. He traced the drain of bullion from the Bank of England, and compared with its fluctuations Mr. Gladstone's changes of the interest on Exchequer Bills ; cited the withdrawal of 3,000,0001. by the demands for cash as a proof that it was mismanagement to lower the rate of interest ; and censured the use of Savings-banks money for the purchase of Exchequer Bills, as a misappropriation. He admitted that it was perfectly legal; but it was unusual, and never resorted to by statesmen without great reluctance, and never without being accompanied by a statement in Parliament. The necessity was brought about by Mr. Gladstone's reduction of the interest on Exchequer Bills ; it was an emergency of his own creating ; and the selling of stock belonging to the Savings. banks, and funding of Exchequer Rills, ended in an increase of the Na- tional Debt. Mr. Gladstone had endeavoured to show that the reaction in the rate of Exchequer Bills was not excessive, 1)3r comparing the interest with that in France, and with the rate of Consols. Now it is to be hoped that the financial system of France will not be made a model for our own ; and as to Consols, they had declined to 85,—equivalent to an increase of 118. ; while the rate of interest on Exchequer Bills increased from 1/. 17s. to 31.,— an increase of 11. 3s. on the Unfunded Debt. Mr. Baring continued to censure Mr. Gladstone for having violated the correct rule of not entering on one financial operation before completing ano- ther; for not foreseeing the war with Russia ; and for having violated the rule that if the Bank of England should be called upon by Govern- ment to pay a sum towards the quarter's dividends for a particular day, on that day Government would be prepared with the sum necessary to their payment. Having thus censured the past, Mr. Baring proceeded to comment on the present position of the finances of the country. He contrasted Mr. Gladstone's professions of reluctance to increase the Na- tional Debt, or to take loans, with the increase of the Debt already mentioned, and with the Exchequer Bond proposal, which was to all intents and purposes a loan. The great object is money, and Mr. Gladstone had money in the Exchequer ; but he threw away the balances there, and then substituted his bond. Comparing the total es- timated expenditure, 63,039,0001., with the total estimated income of 59,496,0001., there appears a deficiency of 3,543,0001. The House had already given 2,000,0001., leaving about 1,500,0001. to be provided for. Now under ordinary circumstances that might be provided for by Exche- quer Bills; but Mr. Gladstone goes to the market for 4,000,000/. of a loan, —only he tells them that it is not a loan,—and he borrows it, including the bonus, at 4 per cent, with this disadvantage, that he is bound to pay it at a certain time. Having got into that position, Mr. Gladstone sneers at Mr. Pitt as "Heaven-born, —a term which Mr. Gladstone could not claim, since he could not say that, like Mr. Pitt's, his measures were never failures ; he sneers at the gentlemen in the City who make colessal fortunes ; and declares that the House of Commons is answerable for his measures since it has adopted his resolutions. If Ministers want taxes, let them come boldly forward and claim them; but not by irritating puh- lie credit, and irritating the feeling out of doors with these constant marring, meddling changes, exciting distrust and getting little money. Financial mistakes are national misfortunes; financial failures are ca- lamities; and a series of failures is fraught with danger to the credit of this country.

Mr. Wrisow replied to this attack by a specific business statement. In the first place, he showed, as Mr. Gladstone did on the previous occasion, that when the accounts published exhibit certain balances on the quarter, there is in truth a larger balance of money in the Bank. He acknow- ledged that the failure of the conversion scheme, and the payment of the smaller stocks, had absorbed the gain on the Exchequer Bill operation ; but the Funded Debt had been reduced by 11,375,000/. with a saving of interest to the extent of 256,0001. a year and he showed that the tem- porary employment of the Savings-banks money in taking up Ex- chequer Bills returned for cash had for months saved a raising of the in- terest on the whole of the 17,000,000/. of Exchequer Bills, which would otherwise have been necessary. After some details showing the advan- tage which the Bank of England has in its connexion with the Govern- ment, Mr. Wilson reviewed the grievous errors of Pitt's finance resting

i

his survey mainly on S Henry Parnell's analytical account. Pail of this ground had been traversed in a former debate ; but with the help of Par- nell, Mr. Wilson brought out one point more distinctly. The aggregate deficiency with which Pitt had to deal, spread over a period of twenty- four years, amounted to 151,326,2831., or about 6,000,0001, a year. To cover that deficiency, Mr. Pitt raised loans in the aggregate amounting to 603,842,000/., and the property of the country was mortgaged to that amount. Thus an excess of debt was incurred, over the money actually wanted, of more than 450,000,000/., for which not a shilling was ever paid : and we are still paying interest upon this enormous defalcation. Sir Henry pointed out three things as necessary to provide for the event of war,—the contraction of the Unfunded Debt, so as to leave a larger mar- gin for operations ; the seearing of an Income-tax capable of extension ; and the possession of considerable balances of money at the disposal of Government. To secure those things, and to avoid the errors of Pitt's administration, were the principles of the present finance, and the grounds of the proposal to take power for issuing 4,000,0001. more of Exchequer Bills or Exchequer Bonds, After Mr. Wilson's speech, the debate proceeded for a considerable time with much UN of details, but without advancing the discussion. Mr. MALINS followed up Mr. Thomas Baring's argument with another reply to Mr. Gladstone's previous financial statement; more criticisms of the conversion policy ; more censure of the abandonment of 8,000,000/. of balances, and then borrowing 6,000,000k on Exchequer Bonds, &c. &c. Mr. Luso pointed out the parallel between the Exchequer Bonds and

railway debentures. There are 70,000,000/. sterling on these securities in the floating capital of railways; and from the experience of the re- newals, amounting to no less than 14,000,0001. within the year, it is clear that there could be no difficulty in renewing the 6,000,000/. of Ex- chequer Bonds ; thus refuting one of the fallacies or absurdities into which Mr. Baring had been led. Mr. Laing exhorted the Committee to turn from the consideration of petty details, in which mistakes might be detected, to the consideration of Mr. Gladstone's commercial and financial policy in its larger principles,—the reduction of taxes on the sources of industry, the payment of the expenses of the year if possible within the year and the command of an efficient surplus. Mr. CAIRNS devoted him-

self to more general censure on Mr. Gladstone, especially for the Income- tax, which renders a just war unpopular. Mr. Joni( MACGREGOR sup- ported the Government ; so did Mr. HAMLET, especially on the plan of borrowing for a limited time on the strength of current taxation.

Strangers were ordered to withdraw, as if for a division; but after a few moments, Mr. Dints= rose, and complained that no member of the Government had risen to answer Mr. Baring. He then elaborated a very long speech, systematically divided into sections, categorically dealing with Mr. Gladstone's successive errors. The first error was the incau- tious dealing with the Exchequer Bills. The second, the unsuccessful scheme of conversion, binding the country to a stipulated rate for forty years, and attempting to reduce the interest of the National Debt on the eve of war. The third, the proposing of a peace budget on the eve of war ; a peace budget, not only because it comprised repeal of taxes, not only because it promised a further repeal of taxes, not only because it included the extreme rashness and precipitation of diminishing the duties upon tea by one-half, but also because it secured the assent to the reen- actment of the Income-tax on the promise that it should terminate at a fixed time. Here Mr. Disraeli made a long digression in defence of his own plan of finance, which the House rejected. That plan would have secured the country against an unjust Income-tax, such as it now enjoys, would by its adjustments have given one virtually of 6 per cent instead of Mr. Gladstone's 10 per cent. The fourth error was, the reduction of interest, which "enabled" Mr. Gladstone to pay for 3,000,0001. of Ex- chequer Bills. The fifth error, the stockjobbing process with the Savings- banks. But it would be hopeless to enumerate all the errors. Mr. Glad- stone sat down at the commencement of 1854 to propound a peace budget,

with war staring him in the face' and an empty exchequer to cheer him

on. His policy was positively, literally, and radically deceptive. The charge against him was, net that he now wanted six millions, nobody would object to give Ministers six millions, or twelve millions if they wanted it; but it was, that this six millions showed the fallacy of his budget of the 5th March ; and that his attempt to raise a loan by Exche- quer Bonds was an abortion, which he has not yet come forward to con- fess. On this Mr. Disraeli had special information, from that wild city, inhabited, he would not say by savage beasts, but by bulls and bears—in- formation of a great public scandal. "I speak not from hearsay, for, through unknown contributors, I have do- cuments in my possession—letters from three persons, most obscure, penniless varlets, all subscribing 5000/. of Exchequer Bonds. It is a striking thing that these fellows without a roof not only subscribe for 15,000/. of the Ex- chequer, for 5000/. of each of the series, but they received an official answer. What was the reply to them ? That the Government would grant their re- quest? Much more than that. The reply was not only granting the re- quest, but begging, as a particular favour to the Government, that they wield take the whole of the subscription for the series A, and that by doing so they should enjoy all the advantages and privileges which they might ob- tain from series B and C."

With Mr. Gladstone's failure' Mr. Disraeli contrasted Sir Charles Wood's easy raising of a loan inthe glaring period of 1847,—the raising

of 8,000,0004 under the old system, without disturbing the money-market one half per cent. The public may be inclined to trust Sir Henry Par- nell and his school, amongst whom the Chancellor of the Exchequer is

distinguished, with little things, but not in great enterprises ; and when Mr. Gladstone sneered at Mr. Pitt, let him remember how he effected the conversion of the South Sea Annuities. Mr. Disraeli's conclusion and climax was—

"I bear in mind that Mr. Pitt, whatever may be his failings in the opin- ion of the right honourable gentleman, held with a steady hand the helm when every country but Great Britain was submerged in the storm ; and when the right honourable gentleman taunts Mr. Pitt with caressing the bankers and the money-lenders, he must also remember that Mr. Pitt owed to a grateful country an eleemosynary tomb."

Mr. GLADSTONE declined to say much on the exhausted catalogue of what Mr. Baring and Mr. Disraeli had so copiously designated as his financial "errors." On the subject of the Exchequer Bills he had nothing to retract or repent. In his opinion, the advantage of the reduction of the interest to the public was a great and sufficient advantage; and the reduction of the amount of the Unfunded Debt in June last was another great advantage. It was the first time since the peace when a large re- duction of that debt had been effected without loss to the public. As to the conversion of the Minor Stocks, he had himself, at the beginning of the session, spontaneously called the measure an abortion. The Savings- banks money had been invested beneficially to the investors : bound to invest it, he had used it with advantage to the state. As to the doctrine that taxes are not to be repealed when there is a chance of war, it would forbid the repeal of taxes altogether, since there is always a chance of war breaking out in some point of our extended empire : but he did not regret a repeal of taxes which had procured a surplus revenue of nearly 3,500,000/. The Opposition combine the peace budget and the war finance erroneously : but how is it that the people manifest a willingness to suffer taxation never seen at any former period of our history ? Because the principles of "the peace budget" were, to promote the interests of the country, strengthen its resources, and prepare it for every contingency. These principles have secured the confidence of the people in the House of Commons, and have made it back the wishes of the House to meet, by immediate sacrifices, the great expenditure which it is necessary to incur. Mr. Disraeli insisted on calling the raising of money on Exchequer Bonds a " loan" : but it is not a loan in the ordinary understanding of the term. Mr. Baring defines a loan to be something that you must repay : but that is just what in this comitry a loan is not. In the ordinary sense of the word financially, a loan means the purchase of a permanent annuity ; and in that sense the Exchequer Bonds are not a loan. Or if they are a loan, then we contracted a loan of 17,000,000/. when we renewed the Ex- chequer Bills. On the subject of the letters which Mr. Disraeli had in-

troduced to the notice of the Committee, Mr. Gladstone also could tell a tale- " I possibly may not go far wrong if I acquaint the Committee with information that has also been imparted to me as a matter of favour,— namely, that certain of these letters, which are sent out from the Bank, I suppose very much as a matter of form, upon all occasions before the period of deposit,—that certain of these letters were purchased at low rates by gen- tlemen who did it with the view of sending them to the right honourable gentleman, being perfectly sure that he would turn them to the best account in the House of Commons."

Unable to conjecture what Mr. Baring meant by his amendment,— for he said he did not mean a vote of no-confidence ; inferring that he could not expect him to raise the money by Exchequer Bills, since he had spoiled the market for that security ; gathering that the Exchequer Bills were disapproved of ; watching the debate carefully, he came to the conclusion that what the Opposition wanted was a loan in the ordinary sense—a creation of stock—a creation of seven or eight millions, such as Mr. Disraeli praised as having been effected in 1847, only perhaps at a higher interest. Formerly, loans were not welcomed by the party of which Mr. Disraeli calls himself "the humble leader." Dean Swift showed that people and capital might emigrate, but not the land, for whom the loan remained as a perpetual mortgage. But now it is on a loan that "the humble leader" of the Country party is set. Reechoing one of Mr. Disraeli's phrases, Mr. Gladstone challenged the Committee to vote upon this motion as they might think most for the advantage of the country.

Mr. Batumi made a slight reply, and the Committee divided—For the original motion, 290; against it, 186; Government majority, 104.

THE OATHS BILL.

Lord Joust RUSSELL having moved the second reading of the Oaths Bill, Sir FREDERICK TRESIGER moved that it be read a second time that day six months. Sir Frederick referred to the petitions—comprising 106 signatures in favour of the bill, 69 for the alteration of the oaths, 60,171 against the bill—as proof that public feeling was adverse ; and he as- cribed Lord John Russell's annual effort to an unconsidered pledge which he had given on coming into conjunction as Member for the City of Lon- don with Baron Rothschild. The present measure is inconsistent, Sir Frederick argued, with the previous authorities =Lord John's own side; Lord John himself having moved to prevent Mr. Salmons front taking his seat until he should have taken the oath of abjuration, two solemn decisions in the Court of Exchequer having declared the oath es- sential to the admission of a Member. Yet in 1854 Lord John has intimated that Baron Rothschild might be introduced by a resolution of the House. Clearly, therefore, arrayed against his own au- thorities, Lord John does not think a bill necessary for the admission of Jews. What, then, can be the object of the present bill ? Evidently, it is intended and calculated solely for the benefit of Roman Catholics, and of those members of the Established Church who are restless on the question of supremacy. Sir Frederick entered at great length, but not with great closeness, upon the history of the oath as it now stands, in order to show that it is necessary to stem that Papal aggression which Lord John Russell was obliged to resist • that it had been fixed in its present form by mutual concessions; that Lord John, like a condottiere of Italy fight- ing on any side, had himself resisted the attempt made in 1849 to disturb the settlement, but now, notwithstanding the constant and persevering encroachments of a church which has learned much and forgotten nothing, Lord John endeavours in the new oath, with its maimed and mutilated form of abjuration, to realize the idea of Caligula, by including as many points of the constitution as possible so as to cut them off at one blow.

Mr. GLADSTONE replied with equal length, but with more closeness. Apologizing for a supererogation, he vindicated Lord John against the charge of adopting the measure after his conjunction with Baron Roth- schild. He quoted a speech made by Lord John, some time back, to show that for a long series of years he had spoken and voted on a similar motion ; and that in 1846, the year before Baron Rothschild's election, Lord John promised a deputation of Jews that he would take up the subject. Sir Frederick Thesiger had said, that if there were deficiency in his advocacy there were yet behind him divers stout and ablebodied men who would supply his deficiency. Were those stout and ablebodied persons the right honourable gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire, the noble lord the Member for King's Lynn, or the Solicitor-General un- der Sir Frederick's Attorney-Generalship, who were at daggers drawn with him on the question of Jewish disabilities ? Sir Frederick com- plained that there would be a maimed and mutilated acknowledgment of the supremacy. Now, in the bill there is no such maimed and mutilated acknowledgment, for there is no acknowledgment of supremacy at all. In fact, the oath called the oath of supremacy does not assert the supre- macy of the Crown.

Here Mr. J. G. PIULLIMORE observed that Mr. Gladstone was evidently referring to the oath of allegiance, and not to that of supremacy.

Mr. GLADSTONE begged the honourable and learned gentleman's par- don ; for he was referring, distinctly and solely, to the oath of supremacy. But if such men as Sir Frederick Thesiger and Mr. Phillimore were mis- led, what must be the Cimmerian darkness of others ? In fact, the posi- tive supremacy declared and intended in the oath of Elizabeth, was altered in the reign of William and Mary to a negative supremacy—a declaration denying the rights and encroachments of the Pope. The positive supremacy of the Crown it would now be impossible to declare, not only because Roman Catholics deny it, but still more because it is de- nied by Protestant Dissenters and by Scotch Presbyterians. Combating Mr. Whiteside's fear that the 37th article of the Church of England—assert- ing the supremacy of the King, and denying that of the Pope in very plain and direct language, might be twisted in a " non-natural " sense, Mr. Gladstone asserted that article has never been so strained : but he showed that the oath might be twisted ; that the strength of this country and the rights of the Crown consist not in oaths and declarations, but in the attachment and fidelity of the people ; and that the more we blot out all those matters of strife, the sooner will be consolidated a firm and sure basis for the interests of the country. To prove that oaths cannot bind men who think the obligation inconsistent with their duty, he showed how Protestants themselves, who ought to be precluded from giving votes that affect the property of the Church, had the other day proposed to deal with it by extincti al. Was that a lawful vote ? [Mr. Daum- isorin—" No."] Yet, so thought the 129 Members who voted on Tues- day night. The idea which Sir Frederick had ascribed to Caligula be-

the oath taken by bishops and archbishops of the Church of Rome, to show similar mots, said, Dissent is a luxury already marked out for him ; answering the objections of various Mem- hers. He showed, that by the Catholic Emancipation Act, Roman Catho- lics are exempted from the provisions of the Act of William and Mary ; and that therefore the argument of Mr. Napier, if admitted at all, would

require the Emancipation Act to be repealed. In his own form, how- there

ever, Lord John had taken the very words in the oath of 1829; endea- vouring to select words which all Members could adopt He exposed at some length, with great force, the stultified working of the present oath ; which virtually takes bail against men from whom no danger could be apprehended. "If suspected persons are to be subjected to any restraint, jt. With regard to the present bill, he might be defeated that night, futile attestations, such as the one that the swearers would not recognizeec any of the descendants of King James the Second ; Lord John hoping that oath might be buried in the very tomb which a Sovereign of this country had provided for the last of the Stuarts in Rome. Oaths, in fact, are futile to those that believe the oath to be contrary to their duty. On he could not consent to the introduction of this bill. the experience of King Charles the Second's reign, the House of On a division, the motion was carried, by 129 to 62. The bill Commons adopted a new oath after seventeen days' debate, declar- was brought in, and read a first time.

ing it not lawful on any pretence whatever to take up arms LAW RRPORM. against the King. Lord Halifax, as able and witty a man as In Committee on the Common Law Procedure (No. 2) Bill, Lord Sr. any who took part in the debates at that period, said that if every LEONARDS stated several objections. He was unwilling to alter the law man in a town took the oath not to break into his neighbour's house, no that requires unanimity in a jury ; but as there might be one obstinate one would for that reason leave his doors unbolted. And the event man, he would agree that the minimum of concurring voices in a verdict justified his argument ; for when the people of this country believed it should be eleven. He also objected to the clause respecting the dis- their duty to take up arms against King James, they did it without regard pensing with oaths; and thought that subject should be brought before to the oath. To show bow impossible it is to deal with such subjects as Parliament in a distinct measure. The provisions of the bill authorizing the restraint of Romanist encroachments by so 'feeble and simple an in- the Common Law Courts to deal with pure equitable suits were also ob- strument as an oath, Lord John cited the evidence given by Dr. Wise- jeetionable; but there are, no doubt, many points on which it is desirable man in the Sussex Peerage ease ; when it was stated that the spiritual that the Courts of Law and Courts of Equity should be permitted mu- authority of the Pope had been exercised by Dr. Wiseman judicially, in tually to adopt each other's powers, so as to carry a case through to its separating, under spiritual penalty, persons whom he did not think to be completion without needless reference to the other. But under this bill lawfully married ; thus enforcing a very important civil consequence. the Common Law Courts are empowered to grant injunctions, for in- Ineffectual as a bar to acts of that kind, the oath has been used as a stance, quite in ordinary course-, and, tha powers vested in them with restraint upon the political duty of the Roman Catholic in Parliament. respect to questions of specific performance go far beyond those now ex- In fact, the obligations to take the oath does not alter the law of the

land, but only stamps a portion of our fellow subjects as being enabled to ercised by a Court of Equity.

legislate for the benefit of the country. for unanimity in a jury had caused great hardship, and it would be in- Mr. DISRAELI, speaking with great solemnity—acknowledging Lord possible to give the subject the go-by. The course suggested by the John Russell's eminent services in the cause of religious liberty—declar-

ing Lord Chief Justice, and adopted in the bill, was, that if a jury did not ing that he himself was under no restraint or urgency from his political friends, and assuring the House that he spoke under the most earnest and or eleven were agreed in opinion, the judge should receive that opinion

solemn convictions—avowed himself in favour of emancipating the Jews, regard to oaths, he repeated the state- but against this bill. He expatiated on the debt which all Christians owe as the verdict of the jury. With

to people of that race for their own faith ; he observed that the House of ment he made on introducing the bill. The object was not to relieve parties from taking oaths, but to relieve the party requiring the testi- Commons would not have existed at this time if it had not been for the mony of a witness who objected to taking an oath. All that the present translation of the Bible ; that the people of Scotland are indebted bill proposed, in respect of equity, was to bring the suit so within'the for their liberties to 'the sword of the Lord and of Gideon " ; jurisdiction of a Court of Common Law as that it might be enabled to de- and he believed that the Jews must ultimately attain their object. On termine the whole case. Anticipating objections, a clause bad been intro- this subject, however, they have no cause to complain : the question has duced into the bill enabling a Court of Common Law to send a cause to a only been debated for a few years ; and if Lord John would compose an oath specially for Jews, it should have his support. But he thought the ui present an inopportune moment to propose alteration in the oath of Court could not deal with it for want of ts.ill passed through Committee, with o nl y some verbal amend- supremacy. Papacy is one of the greatest of human inventions : it is

only three years since Lord John himself announced a formidable Papal mea Nurs QUESTION. conspiracy ; and the House must not think that the Papacy is as change-

able in opinion as an English Minister, or that subjects so serious are to Mr. Whiteside's Property Disposal Bill has again been debated. The be dismissed on the authority of wits like Lord Halifax. reader will recollect that its object is to prevent women who have pro- After a few words from Mr. Musvz and Mr. Got:mu:nil, both against fessed themselves nuns from executing deeds or other instruments for the the Bill, and the latter declining to reopen the compromise of 1829, the disposal of property in favour of the conventual establishments of which House divided—For the amendment, 251; against it, 247; majority they have become members. The debate had stood adjourned since the against the second reading, 4.

bill for the entire abolition of Church-rates. The bill enacts, that in future no church-rate shall be levied in any parish in England or Wales; with a proviso that where money has been legally borrowed on the have been put an end to by the withdrawal of the bill. Lord Palmers- security of the church-rates such rates may still be levied until the debt is liquidated. In moving for leave, Sir William observed, that since the decision of the House of Lords in the Braintree case, in sixteen. As a proof of the injustice of these rates, he showed from the Census report, that out of sittings provided for 10,212,563 persons, 5,317,915 belong to the Established Church, and 4,894,648 to the Non- sive. Much debate followed, and many Members engaged in it on either conformists ; and that on Census Sunday there were in attendance on divine worship 5,603,815 of the Established Church and 5,292,251 in the discussion, and the debate again stood adjourned. places of worship belonging to the Nonconformists. As a proof that the INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

Church would not suffer from the abolition of these rates, he showed, In Committee on the Middlesex Industrial Schools Bill, Mr. MULLINGS that during the last twenty years 2027 new churches have been built, at moved the omission of a clause empowering the visitors, when there may a cost of 6,087,0001.; of which only 511,385/. came from the public funds, be a sufficient number of children of different denominations in a school, and 5,000,000/. from private funds. In consequence of the refusal of a to employ ministers of different denominations to perform divine service church-rate at Liverpool, the Rector has called upon his congregation to in the school. Mr. Joins BALL, Sir GEORGE GREY, Sir Joins Pexiisc- make a voluntary contribution : weekly collections had since been made lux, and Mr. DRUMMOND opposed the motion; while Mr. NEWDEGATE, yielding an average of 15/. Mr. FETO seconded the motion. Mr. Sroorma, and Mr. ADDERLEY supported it. Mr. Adderley said the

longed to the more savage monster Nero : but Mr. Gladstone felt thank- A debate followed, in which many Members tookpart., chiefly ad.. ful to Lord John for having bundled up these oaths and given them one vaneing well-known argumemts on both sides. Mr. Wiemisi Bald that

neck, so that they might be destroyed at a blow. the obligation to pay church-rates is as dear as the obligation to pay Mr. NAPIER opposed the bill. lie appealed to the Bill of Rights, tithe. The church is for the benefit of the nation, and not for a pertain- which includes the oath of supremacy as marking that the object of the lar sect, and all ought to contribute to it. Lord STANLEY said, if oath isis a part of the constitution. On the same side were Mr. J. G. ment left the church-rates alone, in four or fiveyears the question will Pinisimons, Mr. NEWDEGATE, and Mr. H. T. LIDDELL. The bill was settle itself. Suspended until the decision of the Braintree ease, the agi. supported by Sir Rears WALMSLEY, as conceding to the people the right teflon has now revived, and many of the most Conservative boroughs in to choose their own representatives; and by Mr. MALL, who illustrated the country have refused to levy a rate. This state of things will pro.

the objection to oaths by a very forcible simile— bably continue, and the question will be settled by the refusal of every " The exaction of indiscriminate oaths appeared to him to be the very borough to pay church-rates; but at the cost of much ill-feeling. If clumsiest mode of obstructing the exercise of spiritual influence. You might Parliament tried to alleviate the pecuniary burden, they would make the as well guard yourself against the suggestions of the Evil One by shutting rate less productive, but not less objectionable. He believed the time has your doors and windows, or prevent your thoughts from wandering by put- come when the rates must be abandoned ; and he thought Sir William hag yourself under a glass case."

Mr. WHITMIRE made an elaborate and powerful speech, principally Clay had exercised a wise discretion in not stating the funds out of w based upon Irish experiences and his observations at Rome; and citing hich church-rates are to be taken. Mr. DRU3IMOND, among other

which must be paid for. " You

that they own a distinct and supreme allegiance to the Pope. can't keep a pack of hounds or have a box at the opera without paying Pointing to the curious turn which a discussion on the admission of the for them; and why are you to have the luxury of abusing bishops and Jews had taken, Lord JOHN RUSSELL himself proceeded in the course attacking church establishments, and not pay in return for it the miser- able pittance of a church-rate? •' Lord Joins RUSSELL brought the debate to a close by a speech against

the motion. Recounting the attempts to settle the question by compro- mise, under Lord Grey and Lord Melbourne, and the little disposition there ever existed to accept a compromise, he described the bill as one of series of attacks upon the Church, which will be followed by other at- tacks, ending he could not say where if peace were purchased by conces- sion on every occasion. Church-rates are a great hardship, but no satis- factory settlement will be arrived at unless based on a fair consideration of the rights of the Church. " I do not think it would be wise," he said, I you say, it will be a great satisfaction to me to put that restraint upon " do not think it would be consistent with an established church in those who are not suspected." Another considerable portion of Lord this country, that you should totally abolish church-rates." Churches are national structures, and their maintenance should be a national ob- John's speech exposed the irreverence of taking God to witness vain and jt. With regard to the present bill, he might be defeated that night, futile attestations, such as the one that the swearers would not recognizeec as the House was thin ; but he should oppose the bill on the second read- ing. He expressed strong doubts as to whether any bill framed to meet the justice of the ease would pass through Parliament ; but at all events

The I,onn CHANCELLOR, meeting the objections, said that the necessity

unanimously agree to a verdict after twelve hours' deliberation, and if ten Court of Equity wherever the nature of the defence was such that the machinery.

The b

5th April, on the second reading of the bill ; and it was resumed on Wednesday. Mr. MALIN8 argued at great length in favour of the bill. CHURCH-RATES. He also contended, that in the previous portion of the debate Lord Pal- Sir WILLIAM CLAY has succeeded in a motion for leave to bring in a

merston had adopted the principle, and only urged Committee objections.

Sir JOHN Yourso, in opposition to the bill, characterized the debate as

one of those unhappy polemical discussions which he had hoped would ton, he said, had, on mature consideration, come to the conclusion that the bill was offensive, and would be inoperative ; and, speaking for him- self, Sir John objected to the bill as infringing the great principle of com- plete toleration. This Sir JOHN PAKINGTON denied; describing the eon- duet of the Government in relation to the bill as unsatisfactory and eva- side ; until the SPEAXER, at the usual hour on Wednesdays, cut short the provision would be found to be utterly impracticable, and an impediment in the working of these institutions. He was sorry to find that the reli- gious question was a bugbear in the way of all practical measures like the present. It was provided that juvenile offenders should not be compelled to attend any religious service contrary to their religions principles : could anything be more ridiculous, especially when most likely they have no religious principles at all ? On a division, the amendment was negatived by 190 to 108; and the bill passed through Committee.

DANGEROUS ANLILALS.

Lord LANESBOROUGH moved the second reading of the Dangerous Ani- mals Bill, extending to the rural districts the law which prohibits dog- carts in the Metropolis, giving Magistrates power to destroy rabid ani- ma/s, and making provision with respect to horned cattle. The Earl of IIARDWICKE objected, that the bill would produce great hardship to a large class of people. In one district alone there are 18,000 of these carts. Farmers would also be much annoyed to find that they could not turn out their bull calves, under penalties. Ile moved that the bill be read a second time that day three months. Lord BERBERS, Lord CHI- CHESTER) and the Earl of Wie&Low supported the bill ; the last-named Peer asking why it should not be lawful to shoot rabid animals in Ireland as well as in England. "Bulls are not to be shot in Ireland," exclaimed Lord REDESDALE, to the amusement of their Lordships. The Earl of CARNARVON also supported the bill ; but Lord REDESDALE objected that it would do no good. Ultimately the motion was negatived without a division, and the bill was lost.

,SCOTCH SaworatearEns.

On presenting petitions praying that the House would not sanction the severance of public schools from the Church of Scotland, the Duke of BUCCLEUCH called attention to the wihappy position of the Scotch school- masters. An act passed in 1803 fixed the amount of their salaries in money for twenty-five years on an average price of oatmeal. By the average taken in 1828 the maximum was 341. and the minimum 251. The last twenty-five years expired in November 1853, and from an average then taken the maximum would be reduced to 261. and the minimum to 19/. What did Government mean to do ? The Earl of ABERDEEN said, he was ready to redeem the pledge he gave last year, that if no provision were made by law as part of a general system of education, then there should be a temporary increase in the stipends to bring them up to the former average. The Lord-Advocate would introduce a measure for that pur- pose; temporary only, because it is still hoped that such an augmented provision may be created with a general system of education, without which a large increase of stipends would be unreasonable.

Some Peers raised an incidental discussion on the late Government Bill for Education in Scotland. Lord BROUGHAM suggested that there should be two bills brought in,—one for the towns and one for the coun- try, between which there is the greatest diversity. Whatever may be the case in the country, it is impossible to exaggerate the want of educa- tion in the towns. Lord ABERDEEN corrected Lord Brougham : he had not stated that the Government should bring in a bill on the general sub- ject 'of education in Scotland.