illebatett an ProcreltingtdiiVat - Lament.

LUSH TITHES.

The House of Commons, on Monday, went into Committee on the Irish Tithe Bill. The first clause being proposed, Sir ROBERT PEEL moved an amendment, giving the tithe.owners permission to prosecute their claims for arrears by legal proceedings, in ease they preferred that course to accepting the sum in lieu of arrears which the Government might be able to offer them. Sir Robert gave an additional explanation of his plan. He would take it for granted, that 260000/. and 40,0001., which Lord John Russell expected to re- cover from tithe-debtors—together, 300,0001.—were placed in the hands of three Commissioners, who would act without remuneration ; two to be appointed by Government and one by the Primate, or all three by the Government on the understanding that one was to act for the Irish Church— He should propose that those three Commissioners should review the whole State of arrears due by the occupying tenants, arid by them only; that they should collect precise lefinniation—and it might be acquired with ease—with respect to the amount of arrear now due, not on account of the years 1836 and 1837 only, but on account of the last four years, or which might be taken gene- rally as those of 1834, 1835, 1836, and 1837. He should then propose that the arreals should be classed under the different heads of 1834, 1835, 1836, and 1837; iind where any special circumstances were connected with each year's amount, that they should be made the subject of notice. After the Commission had declared the amount of arrears, aud determined what proportion was due on each of the several years to which he had referred, he should then propose that the money appropriated by the Government should be devoted, not to liquidate the arrears of use year or two years, but to embrace within its scope the whole arrears of four pool.; Dot soeseeerily applying to the whole as an indispensable principle, but out vie pp yeas from a participation in the benefit. For in.

atatice,St. t a less_sum ought to be paid for arrears which s

accrued in the year 1834 ti an for those which accrued in the year 1833, There might be cases in which this would not be a lair distribution. He alluded to those instances in which the clergyman evidently sacrificed his one interests, by forbearing to enforce his rights, from an unwillingness to intreduce discord into his parish. He should propose that the Commission having asees tamed the facts, a distribution should be made, according to theprincipleisl justice; the opinion of the Legislature or Treasury not being decisive unless it met with the concurrence of the clergy. As he had already said, he believed that in nine cases out of ten the offer would be accepted. Lord John Russells proposal was, that payment being made of the arrears of the last two years, the right to arrears previously accruing should be absolutely violated. Now, surely there could be no justice in that. Surely there could not be a more dangerous principle than, after acknowledging claims and giving them a legal remedy, that the claims should be extinguished and the remedy destroyed, although the j y had money in their possession which might be found to answer all just de. mands. As he had already stated, he had no doubt that his offer would be se. cepted ; but, at the same time, he would limit the period within which the parties should be at liberty to accept. Suppose that some such terms es there were offered—fifty per cent, upon arrears due in the first two years, and eisiy. five per cent, for arrears due in the last two years. Observe what would be the result—the greater the number of refusals of the offer, the greater would be the sum to be divided amongst those who accepted it. Parties, therefore, would have to determine whether they would be left in the situation of seeing their brethren receive a greater amount of percentage than themselves, or whether upon the whole' the it would not be better for them to accept the offer made by Government. He believed that the result of that controlling check would be to induce an anxiety in the minds of almost all the parties interested to take advantage of the terms held out to them by the Government. He believed, also, that the plan would be eminently successful, and that it would remove all just ground of complaint.

He certainly wished to have a larger sum than that mentioned, but lie presumed that it could not be increased. Sir Robert then referred to Lord Hovidek's speech on the previous Thursday, which he had read with the deepest regret. He did not understand bows Minister of the

Crown, having abandoned the Appropriation principle, should lay down the same doctrine in language calculated to keep alive jealous and angry feelings, and prevent the amicable settlement of the Tithe slues. tion-

The noble lord might rest assured that it would be utterly impossible for hint

to maintain the position he assumed the other night. The noble lord declared that if he pushed his principles to their legitimate conclusion they would go much further. Why did he not push them: why did he not tell the House what were the legitimate and practical conclusions which be would draw from the position he assumed ? Sir Robert conceived that they amounted to nothing mote nor less than this' the establishment of the religion of the majority. That appeared to him to be the legitimate conclusion at which the noble lout would art ire—to transfer the property of the Church from the minority to the majority, and to establish the Roman Catholic religion. If these were the legitimate conclusions to which the noble lied referred, he must be allowed to tell him that no intermediate arrangements that he could make would secure the peace and tranquillity of Ireland.

Sir Robert insisted upon the legal right of the Protestant minority to the property of the Church; and declared that he would not abandon that position for the one which Lord Howiek offered hint, and which was ten times more insecure and more difficult to defend.

Lord J0114 RUSSELL adhered to his own plan for the settlement of

the tithe arrears, and repeated the arguments he urged on the previous Thursday in its defence. In reference to Sir Robert Peel's remarks on Lord Howiek's speech, Lord John said, that it would have been more in ascordance with the general desire to come to a satisfactory arrangement, not to have again broached the subject; but since Lord Howick's speech had been taken as indicative of the course Govern. mem would pursue, Loid John felt it necessary to repeat his own opi- nions on that point, especially as he equally dissented from Lord Howick and from Sir Robert Peel on this question—.

lie thought that the proposition made by the Government in 18134 and 1835, i that a part of the revenues of the Church n Ireland should his appropriated to the general education of the people, without distinction of religious persuasions, was a vety fair, and he thought likely to be a very successful compromise be- tween the pretensions of different parties in Ireland. That proposition, how. ever, after much discussion, and after being repeatedly rejected, was described by the one party as not giving what they wished with respect to the claims of the Romau Catholics, and by the other party was denounces! as tending slowly to the destruction of the Protestant Establishment in Ireland. That being the ease, and looking at the future condition of the Church in Ireland, while they saw on the one hand that that Church would be rendered more secure by having its income immediately derived from the owners of the soil, of whom the great majority were Protestants, it was impossible not to see, on the other, that there would still remain this great distinction between the Established Chinch in Ireland and the church establishment of any other country, namely, that the Church Establishment of Ireland did not provide for the religious and moral instruction of the great body of the people.

From the Voluntary principle he entirely dissented ; and, " notwith. standing its anomaly," was in favour of "a Church Establishment in Ireland, seeing not only that it had been founded and protected by the most solemn laws, but seeing also that it made a bond of connexion between the two countries "—

But while he was for maintaining the Church in Ireland, and while he was in favour of the principle of church establishments generally, he could not hut think that, one day or other' before many years had passed, Parliatnent, units!' it were to fall into what he should consider the limentable error of adopting the Voluntary principle, either in Ireland or in any part of the United Kingdom, would come at last to adopt, in some shape or other, the resolution once carted in that House, that the Roman Catholic people of Ireland should have their religious instruction provided by the State. That resolution, if he remeni- bered right, was brought forward by Lord Francis Egerton ; and it propowd that a provision should be made by law for the support of the Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland. He believed, however, that if such a proposition were made now, the whole of the Roman Catholic clergy, and a great body of the Roman Catholic laity, would at once reject it. He believed also that the members of the Scotch Church would oppose it, that every Protestant Dissenter in the kingdom would be violently against it, and very probably that a consider- able portion of the members of the Church of &ghosd would resist it. There. fore, when he gave it as his opinion that the time would come when the Romtin Catholic clergy would be supported by the State, he was giving utterance to 50 opinion which he confessed be did not think it very prudent for a person stand. ingin the situation of a Minister of the Crown to express. But the question having been so mooted and so commented upon, he felt bound to declare, that if be were to speak of what he thought would be the ultimate state of things in Ireland, if Parliament should at length consent to consider this question cf tithes with A vieW to ina.final settlement, his opinion was, that wnlie the Este- bltished Church, with a moderate revenue, would not be endangered, still the time would come when the Legislature would think that the teachers and in- structors of several millions of people, forming the great majority of the popu- lation of Ireland, ought likewise to be paid and supported by the State. Lord HOWICK knew from long experience, that when any Member expressed sympathy and agreement with a considerable number of per- s° s who complained of a grievance, be was invariably charged with fomenting enting and exciting the dissatisfaction he sought to appease. But if there was real ground for the dissatisfaction, it would exist without the excitement of speeches ; and if there were no substantial grievance, the most inflammatory harangue from a Minister of the Crown or any other Member of the House would pass by like the idle wind. Now, be was convinced that, in the nature of things, the question to which be had referred must at some time or other come under the considera- tion of the House; and, as he had frequently observed, that the con- duct of persons who refrained from stating their real opinion of the consequences of measures at the time those measures were passed be-

came subsequently liable to much misrepresentation, he had resolved

on this occasion to declare what he felt assured must be the result of these discussions on the Irish Church. When the Catholic Relief Bill passed, he had been only prevented by the advice of persons much

older than himself from declaring his conviction that further ques- tions must force themselves upon the Legislature. Sir Robert Peel

bad often blamed those who at that time concealed their ulterior views ; and Lord Howiek was determined that such a reproach should not again be applied to him— It was impossible, in his opinion, that the existing state of things could continue. It was impossible that the small minority of Episcopal Protestants should retain

long an immense church establishment for thew exclusive benefit. The Pres- byterians, comprising, as they did, a large proportion of the wealthier classes in Ireland, had also a right to assistance from the State with respect to religious instruction; and above all, the great bulk of the people, the poorest and must destitute, those who could hardly procure the necessaries of life, should not be left without assistance in acquiring moral and religious instruction. The pre-

sent was, in fact, a state of things in his opinion so opposed to the obvious dic-

tates of natural justice, that it could not permanently continue. He (lid not hesitate to say, that he fur one regretted, that at an earlier period of our history the great mistake was 'node of altering the character of the church establish- ment before the religion of the people was altered. That was a fatal mistake; but he did not think that that mistake would now be remedied by a transfer of the property of the Protestant Church to the Roman Catholics. With the opinions Just uttered by Lord John Russell respecting the payment of the Catholic clergy he perfectly concurred ; but he did believe, that hereafter it

would be found necessary to pay, if not the Catholic clergy, at all events those lay teachers who should be appointed to communicate moral and religious in- struction. He believed that ultimately that course would be absolutely neces- sary. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, his complaint was that after the most solemn assurances had been given by the leaders of the Catholic party, that

the Church of Ireland should be protected, riot attacked, it had, since

the passing of the Catholic Emancipation Bill, been continually assailed by that party. There appeared to be considerable discrepancy

between the two noble lords. Lord Howick considered it highly proper to express his opinions at all times, whereas Lord John Rus- sell had said that it was highly dangerous and imprudent in a Minister of the Crown to express his opinions on this subject. It was, how- ever, of great importance to have drawn an explicit declaration of his opinions from Lord John Russell, after the declaration of Lord How. irk against the Irish Church Establishment.

Lord HOWICK complailied that he had been misrepresented. He never said any thing so ithstard as that an individual Member should at all times trouble the House with a full statement of his views and opinions, but that on great questions it was the safest and best policy not to conceal opinions on which it might be necessary to act after- wards.

Mr. CLAY wished the clause to be withdrawn altogether. The people of England viewed with more and more disgust the system of subsidizing the Irish Church.

Lord STANLEY entered into a long discussion of the two propositions for the settlement of the tithe arrears ; and finally gave his own opinion in favour of Sir Robert. Peel's, on the ground that it kept the tithes alive, and offered a fair compromise to the tithe-owners without infringing on the legal rights of the latter.

Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN calculated that the tithe arrears at present amounted to 800,0001., and Lord John Russell called upon the tithe- owners to abandon their claims for 260,000/. Now, he would limit the remission to the Catholic tithe-debtors, but would increase the amount to half a million.

Mr. REDINGTON was dissatisfied with both propositions ; but as the lesser evil, would support that of the Government—.

He took this opportunity of guarding himself against using any expression Whici might indicate that he would be satisfied by either of the plans sue- geste/I; and should this measure heroine the law of the land, he did not at till consider that his position as to hostility to tithes in Ireland would be altered, but, as a landlord, he should still oppose their continuance. Mr. SPRING RICE contended, that the recovery of the tithes of 1834 and 1835 was out of the question ; and that, with the sum Lord John Russell proposed to place in the hands of the Commissioners, it would be feasible to settle the arrears of 1836 and 1837; and he therefore strongly urged upon the Committee the wisdom of acceding to the Government scheme.

Mr. O'CONNELL and Mr. SHEIL spoke in favour of the clause as Proposed by Lord John Russell. With respect to the alleged differ- ence between Lord John Russell and Lord Howick, Mr. Sheil said, that he had been a close observer of the political career and opinions of both noble lords, and would maintain that no difference on the sub- ject of the Irish Church really existed between them. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that, giving Mr. Shell full credit for acute- ness and candour, before adopting his opinions, he should correct the Greenwich observations by reference to some other observatory. (Great laughter.) 1833 was wished it to be remembered that Sir Robert Peel in !rn°00 In favour of remitting the entire million, but now wished to

I pose on the Government the onus of collecting the tithes.

The Committee divided—

For the clause 122 For Sir Robert Peel's amendment 101 Ministerial majority 21 Mr. HustE moved to strike out the clause altogether.

For the motion 43 Against it 171 Majority 178 A brief discussion and several divisions took place on the remaining clauses; which, however, were all passed without material alteration.

The third reading was fixed for Thursday ; Sir Robert Peel under- taking by that day to ascertain the opinions of the " natural represen- tatives of the Church," as to whether the clause should be retained or rejected.

The order of the day for the third reading of the bill having been moved on Thursday, by Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Mr. Roniarr DILLON BnowNE moved that it be read a third time that day three months. He despoiled of attracting Lord John Rus- sell's attention ; for, in a previous debate, a Member possessed of im. measurably higher talent than himself and honoured with the esteem of men of all parties, had been treated by Lord John with all the dignity of official indifference ; by which the impression was created, that the matter being no longer a subject of party trial, and only affecting the happiness of Ireland, had become unworthy the attention of the leader of the House of Commons. He would not, however, shrink from his duty ; the performance of which was the more imperative in conse- quence of the extraordinary silence of the Irish Members,—a silence which, when contrasted with the loud and distinct declarations of the people of Ireland, was the more unaccountable.

Ile must denounce this bill as pregnant with mischief, and declare that the secession of her Majesty's (jowl ninent from their professions was calculated to deprive them of the confidence of the people of Ireland. He took the speech of the noble lord the representative of the Irish Government in that House, as the apology of the rest of his colleagues : a speech more unsatisfactory to Ire- land, or to those who wished that the character of the present Administration should be maintained, he had never heat (I. Ile wondered that the noble lord had not the prudence to remain silent. The gist of the noble lord's speech was, that lie still adhered to his opinions with respect to appropriation, but that he would carry a bill bereft of that principle. Now Ile thought that when the opinions of a statesman were not made the elements of his political conduct, they were of no value tel any 011e but himself ; and that it was not prudent of a Minister of the Crown to declare that lie was about to act contrary to his

avowed convictions. The noble hod hail stated that he supported this bill because it would tranquillize Ireland. This WI!: the question at issue, and this

assertion had become the most perfect Julia() principii he had ever heard. He would ask the noble lord, from what demonstration of public opinion in beland favourable to that bill had he conic to this conclusion? And as excite- ment in that or any other country must arise out of the popular impulse, it was only by such a demonstration he could arrive at such a conclusion. Ile held in his hand a summary of the proceedings of diffeient meetings held in Ireland, comprehending more than a million of human beings, where not a single senti- ment favoutable to this bill could have been recorded, and where the united voice of the country Ian' exclaimed against the unnatural compromise.

Mr. Browne partimilarly referred to the numerous meetings in Kil- kenny, Callow, Wexford, and Kildare ; at one of which, attended by 150,000 persons, Mr. Boyce of Bannow, a Protestant gentleman of fortune, presided. lie asked for evidence in proof of the assumption that the bill would tranquillize the country, in opposition to the pro- ceedings of the meetings referred to, where it was vehemently de- nounced, and the determination to resist it when it became law unani- mously avowed— lie would like to know where Lord John Russell finnol at the present time, or at any time antecedent to it, the slightest shade of popular favour extended to this measure? They never expressed a single sentiment even in favour of the louilly.trumpeted Appropriation-clause. When that in inciple was made the corner- stone of an Administration then dear to the people of Ireland, the people of that country repudiated the paltry compromise, and asserted their national dignity in asserting their national consistency. The principle of total abolition bore upon it the strength of a century ; it had been cemented by cppression. Were they to be told by the noble lord, that this important mea- sure would eradicate just principles from the minds of the people? The noble lord had said that thrice they sealed the perilous breach, and thrice they were defeated, and that was a reason why they should desist from their undertaking. Was such a principle to goide men in any physical or mental enterprise? Was it with such a spirit that the Barons of England wrested from the tyrant John the charter of their liberties? Was it with such a spirit they obtained their Habeas Corpus and Bill of Rights? Was it with such a spirit that a gallant and honourable Member of this House passed the fatal ditch at Rada- jos? Was it with such a spirit the hormurahle Member for Dublin raised his powerful voice in detence of the liberties of his country in 1799, when the walls of the Royal Exchange were lined with an atmed soldiery ? And was it with such a spirit that the noble lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department propounded his scheme of reform to a listless House of Commons and did not desist until he had aceomplished that great measure, which will hand down to posterity the noble name of the House of Russell associated in credit and honour with the history of the country ?

But consistency, it seemed, was not a quality necessary to modern statesmen ; whose great principle of government was that of "expe- diency "— And what would the country say was the meaning of the word? That it was expedient to keep themselves in office. He thought that men could not lose their political consistency, yielding to no impressions from without, with- out a certain loss of political reputation. He did not mean to say that they should adhere to the same opinions when the country disagreed with them; for as all legislation should reflect the opinions of the community, and as those opinions were subject to change with time, the mind of the Legislature must keep pace with time. But when men .seceded from principles which. at one period they considered to be the essential quality of their political existence, without any external change, they del that whirl] was dangerous as an example,

and calculated to annihilate their political reputation. lie would be told that this was a factiaus speech, and that it was dangerous, under any consideration,

to disturb the Executive. lie could not assent to that proposition, which pre- ferred executive good to legislative good; or rather, be should say, executive harmlessness—for the merit of the present Administration lay more in absti- nence from doing evil than in any positive good they had effected : he disagreed with that declaration, for those who controlled the powers of legislation would soon wield the sword of the executive ; and this was the Ca343 at present—the Whip ▪ administered, the Tories dictated the laws. It was e• vident tbat if mat- ters were allowed to continue, with an increasing Conservative constituency in England, a decreasing Reform one in Ireland, that the Conservatives must come into office ; and as they would cam. in through the weakness of the Reform party, the sooner they did so tie better, for the more strength the Reformers would have left to resi4 them. Toe reason he dissented from the present mea- sure was, that it would either fasten tithes for ever upon the Catholics of Ire- land, or create a servile war betwixt landlord and tenant. The latter was the more likely consequence to ensue.

Mr. HOME seconded the amendment ; as, divested of the Appropria- tion principle, the present measure would he a mere delusion.

Lord EBR1NGT0N would vote for the bill. If he thought it would tend to prevent the reduction of the Irish Clerical Establishment, which was a stain and disgrace to the country, he should have very great difficulty in supporting it : but be foresaw, that if the Tithe struggle were continued, the burden would be placed by this bill on the shoulders of those who would be much better able to carry on the war with effect, than the parties who now resisted payment of tithes.

Mr. WARD, in a brief speech, recorded his "valedictory protest" against the abandonment of "appropriation."

Sir WILLIAM SOMERVILLE said that the bill appropriated 2,5 per cent. of the Church revenue in the very worst mariner, since it put that amount into the pockets of the landlords. He firmly believed that the measure would not be a palliation of the evil ; and would cordially assist his poorer countrymen in their continued efforts to get rid of the Church Establishment. Nevertheless, he would vote for the bill.

Mr. GROTE remarked on the discrepance between the speeches and intended votes of Sir William Somerville and Lord Ehrington. Strongly objecting as he did to the Irish Church, yet he could not bring himself to vote for a bill introduced with a view to strengthen that Church, if he really believed that its effect would be the reverse of what those who proposed it intended. He could not understand how Lord Howick could consent to vote a large sum of the public money merely to put off the settlement of the Tithe question. Of the A p- propnation principle he would merely say, that the altered tone percep- tible on the Ministerial side of the House on that question, afforded a melancholy proof of the way in which great principles were made sub- servient to party purposes. The abandonment of the Appropriation was one of the most discreditable instances of tergiversation on his. torical record.

Mr. Moncate Nino O'CONNELL supported the bill. He saw nothing unmanly in not struggling for a principle which was unattain- able; rior did he consider it inconsistent with honesty and public. spirit to take a measure as good as be could get, because it was not so comprehensive as he could wish. (cheers.) He produced some his- torical details of the progress of opposition to tithes in Ireland, and quoted many instances of pluralism and sinecurism of the Established clergy in Catholic districts.

Sir ROBERT Purr. animadverted on the speeches of Sir William So- merville and Lord Ebrington ; who appeared to consider their declara- tions of hostility to the Church as a set-off against their abandonment of the Appropriation principle. Sir Robert avowed his approbation of many parts of the bill before the House, and his intention to vote for the third reading ; leaving it to the House of Lords, where the Irish Church was more fairly represented, to determine finally what should be done with this great question.

Mr. HARVEY spoke at length in reprobation of the fruitless attempt to purchase tranquillity in Ireland with English money. He calcu- lated that the sum actually paid was four millions ; as the 25 per cent. of tithes remitted to the landlords was, at twenty years' purchase, worth three millions; which sum was to be added to the million voted for arrears.

Lord STANT.F.Y maintained, that as the deduction from the tithe was given to the landlords as an equivalent for their increased liability, and the clergy reaped an advantage from the transfer, it was not just to stigmatize the operation as involving the principle of Appropriation ; which simply took away something from the Church without making any return. He admitted that the bill would not produce peace; but it was a necessary subsidiary to something more important— They relied for its success upon the transfer of the payment to the affluent from the poor—from the pauper tenant to the solvent landlord—from those to whom the payment was disproportioned to their means to those to whom the payment was easy,—a transfer which, while it relieved those who had scruples, would fix the payment on those who could have no such scruples, if they were Protestants. What a large proportion of these were Protestants! And even if they were not, under what liability did they purchase their estates? Now, if he purchased an estate which was liable to a mortgage, and if the mortgagee, not being a Christiao, should apply the interest which he paid to the mainte- nance of a Jewigi synagogue, did that form a fair objection to the payment of interest? Ought he to oppose the payment because his scruples of conscience led hien not to approve of the application of it to a Jewish synagogue? (Cheer; ) He would have accepted the estate liable to the payment ; and so had the landowners in Ireland theirs.

Mr. O'CONNELL did not think the Jewish simile at all applicable-- It was not to the debt, but to the purposes to which it was applied, that the Irish objected. Tithes were not a personal debt, like that mentioned by the noble lord they were is debt which the Catholic ancestors of the Irish people bequeathed to the Catholic Church. The Catholics of Ireland gave the tithes for Catholic purposes, when even the name of Protestant was not known; but an act of Parliament took them away from the Catholics, and gave them to a small minority of Protestants for Protestant purposes; and it was on account of the comparatively small portion of those to whom they were devoted, coupled with the recollection, which would never be effaced, whence the tithes had their origin, which was the foundation of the objection to the tax, and which made the noble lord, in order to save the principle of application, con-

e at to an experiment to maintain them.

Sir Robert Peel had intimated that the bill would be modified to ▪ lit his views elsewhere if it were, Mr. O'Connell hoped that Ministers would abandon it. He warned the House, that whatever became of the present bill, common sense in the end would prevail. The opposition to tithes was not confined to Catholics. Even Lord Alountcashel, an Evangelical Churchman, had presided at a tumultu- ous anti-tithe meeting in Cork county. He rejoiced at the sentiments uttered by Lord Howick- He trusted that a long career of utility would be open to him—a career of

utility of which they had m proof in the advocacy of principles that entitl

i ed 14 • to the foremost station n the Governent of his native country, (c4,_, Those sentiments would go out of that House, and be confirmed hy-"t rational and good man, and would give a hope that the connexion wouidl come a real union between the two countries. He did not think that 4„ were exhibiting any wisdom if they imagined that the shifting the burden tithes from one side to another would render it more easy. They were env. up their attempt to recover tithes from the poor, and he could tell them IQ the richer party would defeat them. ( Cheers.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL referred to Sir William Somerville's speack coupled with the vote he intended to give for the bill, as a proof of th. necessity of the measure. He complained of Mr. Harvey's rematki, and especially of Mr. Grote's- The honourable gentleman the Member for London, with his usual caltalui and in his most dignified tone, bad at the same time made a most severe Li bitter attack on the Government, stating that this was another melancholy stance of postponing principle to party ; and he charged him with tergivete two. The honourable gentleman had a right to his own opinion, that it ate; be better to introduce a bill containing the Voluntary principle, or any see; but he had no right to blame others, acting with a deep sense of responsibility, with what he called postponing principle to party on this subject. Wielos gird to his own opinions on this subject, he must say that his noble friend Member for North Lancashire, knew that those opinions were not takes 4 lightly, or introduced for the first time with a view of depriving the to; honourable baronet of office. His opinions had been frequently stated befoo, to those with whom he was connected in politics or by friendship. He hti stated them amongst the advisers of the Sovereign ; he had stated them that House; and those opinions having been stated, the opinion of the partys which he belonged inclined in favour of his noble friend, and not in favsuoi him. The honourable Member had therefore no right to say that it eat, the sake of party, or with a view to party, that he had originally :militant' those opinions. If he thought it best for the sake of Ireland not to introdss that principle in the present bill, it was because he hail been convinced, ask had already stated on repeated occasions, that lie should not attain any sumo ful result to Ireland by proposing that principle—that it, proposing it he shone be deferring indefinitely the mitigation of the evils of the Tithe system; re be thought, therefore, that it was better for Ireland, for the sake of the laa people, to propose a bill containing the provisions of the present bill.

Lord John entered into a general explanation and defence of th bill; but said little which has not been repeatedly stated in the late cussion of this measure. He considered it a very great advantage tie the conflict on the Irish Church question would in future be carried% between the Church party and the landowners, in a constitutionl manner in Parliament, instead of by appeals to physical force.

The House divided— For the third reading 148 Against it 30

The bill was read a third time.

Mr. HUME moved to strike out the clause by which the balance 01 the Million Loan was granted.

Mr. HARVEY supported this motion.

For it 39

Against it 96

Majority 57

The bill was then passed.

TI1E IRISH POOR BILL.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, on Tuesday, moved the House of Common to consider the amendments of the Lords to this bill.

The SPEAKER said, that, in the first place, his duty required that he should address a few obaervations to the House on this subject. Wan the Lords made amendments on any bill passed by the Common likely to infringe the privileges of the Commons, it was usual to core. miuncate with the Speaker on the subject. It happened that be hi been applied to by a very distinguished person in reference to this bill; C to whom he had replied, as in duty bound, that he considered the " amendments an infringement on the privileges of the Commons— At the same time, as the bill was one of a very peculiar character, affectiog not only the proprietors of the land but the great mass of the people of Heal, and as the principle of rating was necessarily incidental to such a measure, he considered that if the privileges of this House were strictly pressed in such. case, they would almost tend to prevent the House of Lords from taking soda . measure into its consideration in a way that might be on all grounds advisab!e. On referring to precedents, he found two instances—namely, those of the Err. lish Poor-law Bill and the English Municipal Corporations Bill—in amendments were made by the House of Lords which were not strictly io Con, formity with the privileges of the House of Commons. Referring to those pre cedenta, it was for the House to consider whether, in reference to the preset; bill, they should throw out the bill as amended by the Lords, and then intro. duce another bill in which those amendments might be incorporated ; or she. ther they should waive the infringement of their privilege, and proceed to the consideration of the Lords' amendments. As the recognized keeper of the pu. vileges of this House' he had thought it right to explain his conduct on the present occasion; which he trusted would meet with the approval of tit House. At the same time, he'must add, that he thought the privileges albs House would be best secured by being not too far pressed.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL expressed his entire concurrence with the Speaker ; and recommended that the Commons should agree to the Lords' amendments, with some verbal alterations. He did think tint it would be a very vexatious proceeding if the House were to insist upon their privileges on this occasion. On the whole, he felt justified in moving that the Lords' amendments be agreed to.

After a brief discussion, a few alterations were made in some clauset, and the rest of the Lords' amendments passed without a division. PROMOTION IN THE NAVY.

On Wednesday, Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON moved for a Select Com- mittee "to inquire into the situation of officers in the Navy, as com- pared with other branches of the public service." He considered that officers in the Navy were not fairly treated. He had been told that they got honours, but they bad to pay for them. He had been charged 386/. for a mark of distinction, which he did not think was worth 51. and for which he had consequently refused to pay; and be believed that his case was likely to produce some alteration in the mode of disk tributing honours.

Majority

Mr. Citrates WOOD maintained that the Nitvy was in a highly effective state— point which might arik out of it ; and it nu the desire of the great body of It had been asserted that instead of being able to sendthirty liTnehmf.battle silo to sea, we could not, through want of repair, now send eve. ere never to relieve the Church from this inconvenience. The Bishop of Exeter al gild that the bill It' OUi ii take away their jurisdiction from the Bishops; was an assertion more com letely unfounded ; for at this moment, he did believe but, us the cak atood now, Bishops could not preveut a party from removing that in every requisite preparation, short of the ships being actually equipped his cause from the Diouesan Court to the Court of Arches, who would take on. Jr sea, where there were now twenty line.of.battle ships, this country was ginal cognizance of the case. (" Hear, hear ! " from the Bishop of Exeter.) sever in a better state for sending ships to sea. And he was satisfied that in The right reveiend prelate cued " Hear, hear!" did he mean to say that the the course of a month teu times as many ships could be prepared for sea if men "uld be found to man them. The Bishop of Ex ETP.R—" No; it is not so." Complaints had been made that Lieutenants were not promoted : The Archbishop of CA NTERBURY ,aid, he wan very much mistaken if the but he had gone through every. case with Sir Edward Codrington, and case mane not no ; aud the Commissioners also were under &similar mistake, for proved that in the great majority of cases there was no real cause of their rim, t gave an opinion quite diffeient from that of the right reverend pre. late. The Bashop of Exeter had npoken with much complacency of the supe- Captain PECcomplaint- HELL thought that officers should be compensated for

be loss of property by casualties at sea.

to afford means of support to the aristocrucy— should he established, resided over by thoroughly effiient judges, piovided Why, what happened the other day ? Men thirty years in the service were with officers..vho womi'd cal ry as judgments iota effect, and attended by advo- passed over in order to promote the sons of the Troubridget, the Gardners, (ides who could 11 t justice to both parties. It could not be shown that the and the Elliot!. It might be said that the Earl of !Moto had a right to pro- generality of the Di...cut' Courts now in operation presented these all.impor- note his own son : be denied it—he was bound to select the most meritorious. t mt features. 11;s decided c aaviction was, that the COBSCqUeBee of continuing There was the gallart Admiral near him (Sir E. Troubridge) whose son had the present sy-t. m would be the total inefficiency of all eaclesiastical discipline. been advanc (Cries of " Order ! " from the Opposition.) He meant no As to sa) Mg th a the bill was impalateable to the c:eig), he was well assured ed. disrespect to the gallant Admiral; but he maintained that they ought not that it woe the universal anxiety uf the clergy to see some mode brought into blindfolded to allow such unfair selectiens to pass without speakihg out the tffert ItY which jontice ',tumid be dorm upon those who disgraced their sacred -unth• calling. Thsie war none of the respectable clergy who felt that the bill applied Captain PECHELL said that the name of Troubridge was endeared to them.

alluded. " Tanuene aniruis calestibus ire?"

great distinction, and the grandson of an Admiral who in the naval ann w should be borne to the gallant and honoured name of Troubridge, by the pro. motion of a voting officer who stood as high as any in his profession, and who 'rile Bishop of LINCOLN supported the bill saute board with himself, he had shrunk from the duty of promoting the son. 'Ile Doke of WELLINGTON concurred in this euggestion.

Admiralty having SOR4 of their own reared up in the profession, and thoroughly bill hould pass thi session. conversant with as duties, would be fully justified in giving to those sons all Ultimately, the Archbishop of CANTERBURY withdrew it. the benefit of their high station.

Mr. Wanecierost entirely dissented from Sir .Tames Graham's doc- vst's son had been overlooked. He mentioned time case of this gen-

Lord Chancellor COTTENH h AM, on Thursday, moved time third read.

mg of the Church Discipline Bill. The main object object of this measure is to put an end to the jurisdiction of Diocesan Courts in certain cases, and bring clergymen guilty of insubordination or other malepractices at Alember would be very great.

stripped of his see anti his gown, but he would still maintain his own TIIE

than if it had been a chimney.sweeper's bill, through the Committee.

Y observed, with unusual emphasis, T 11 LL that if bard words and specious insinuations were to be attended to, passed.

By the present mode of proceeding, a party could appeal to all tbe Courts,

one after the tither, hot only on the matkr at issue, but oa every incidental

the Bishops

silo to sea, we could not, through want of repair, now send eve. ere never to relieve the Church from this inconvenience. The Bishop of Exeter al gild that the bill It' OUi ii take away their jurisdiction from the Bishops; was an assertion more com letely unfounded ; for at this moment, he did believe but, us the cak atood now, Bishops could not preveut a party from removing that in every requisite preparation, short of the ships being actually equipped his cause from the Diouesan Court to the Court of Arches, who would take on. Jr sea, where there were now twenty line.of.battle ships, this country was ginal cognizance of the case. (" Hear, hear ! " from the Bishop of Exeter.) sever in a better state for sending ships to sea. And he was satisfied that in The right reveiend prelate cued " Hear, hear!" did he mean to say that the the course of a month teu times as many ships could be prepared for sea if men

case was not so ?

Complaints had been made that Lieutenants were not promoted : The Archbishop of CA NTERBURY ,aid, he wan very much mistaken if the but he had gone through every. case with Sir Edward Codrington, and case mane not no ; aud the Commissioners also were under &similar mistake, for proved that in the great majority of cases there was no real cause of their rim, t gave an opinion quite diffeient from that of the right reverend pre. late. The Bashop of Exeter had npoken with much complacency of the supe- rior character of the Diocesan Court of the see of Exeter : now, he had been informed by a very high authority at Doctors' CAKUMOSIS that there were more

appeals frotu the Die:as:an Court of Exeter than from all the rest of England

Mr. HUME said that one half of the Navy was kept up confessedly and Wales. (" //car, hear ! " awl a l(Zugh.) It was essential that a court to afford means of support to the aristocrucy— should he established, resided over by thoroughly effiient judges, piovided Why, what happened the other day ? Men thirty years in the service were with officers..vho womi'd cal ry as judgments iota effect, and attended by advo- passed over in order to promote the sons of the Troubridget, the Gardners, (ides who could 11 t justice to both parties. It could not be shown that the and the Elliot!. It might be said that the Earl of !Moto had a right to pro- generality of the Di...cut' Courts now in operation presented these all.impor- note his own son : be denied it—he was bound to select the most meritorious. t mt features. 11;s decided c aaviction was, that the COBSCqUeBee of continuing There was the gallart Admiral near him (Sir E. Troubridge) whose son had the present sy-t. m would be the total inefficiency of all eaclesiastical discipline. been advanc (Cries of " Order ! " from the Opposition.) He meant no As to sa) Mg th a the bill was impalateable to the c:eig), he was well assured ed. disrespect to the gallant Admiral; but he maintained that they ought not that it woe the universal anxiety uf the clergy to see some mode brought into blindfolded to allow such unfair selectiens to pass without speakihg out the tffert ItY which jontice ',tumid be dorm upon those who disgraced their sacred -unth• calling. Thsie war none of the respectable clergy who felt that the bill applied Captain PECHELL said that the name of Troubridge was endeared to them. to the m hole Navy by a thousand recollections ; and he was persuaded Lord 13tiouctiam had listened with profound respect to the Arch- that the oldest officer would look with pride and pleasure on the pro- bishop of Catita 'dairy; and in reference to the difference between the motion of the young officer to whom Mr. flume had so inopportunely most Reverend Prelate *mid the Bishop of Exeter, would only WT..

Sir James GRAHAM could not suppress his feelings when be heard lie could not, however, support the bill ; because, notwithstanding

the promotion of Sir Thomas Troubridge's son impugned— the high character and great knowledge of Sir John Nichol! and Sir

He dissented from the doctrine that the service of the father was not to Delbert Joiner, the mode of proceeding in the Arches Court was operate favourably in the consideration of the son. lie thought that the sons intolerably vicious. Lord Brougham then described the system On a all meritorious officers ought to be favourably regarded. But in the present which cause were carried 011 ill that Court ; where vied voce evidence instance, the officer promoted was the son of an Admiral who had served with was excluded and documentary evidence alone received, and the expense als of wus ruinous. It as as bad as the old Scotch Court of Session before the country had gained immortal feme. Was it too much that some testimony it was reformed.

deserved well of Ins country if it were only from the recollection of the actions Lord IVvsrotio wished it to be withdrawn, as it could not possibly If to. forefethers? (Cheers.) lie declared that he should have thought Lord be passed this ses-iun in a satisfactory form. Minto guilty of a gross deleliction of duty, it because the father sat at the He would even go further, auml say, that in every instance the Lords of the The Loan Cue:eel-31.0a considered it of great importance that the

ss

Alisct LLANEODS.

trine, that they tvlio occupied high places should be ever forward, nay Tim MAILS ON RAILWAYS BILL was" committed," in the Commons. that they. should consider it their duty, to heap promotion and honour on Saturday last, on the motion of Mr. Lam:tout:nem A long discus. apon their relatives. sion ensued, principally on the question whether railway companies Sir Eowarai Titouintinar said, he was in a very painful situation ; should be compelled to convey the mails on terms to be settleu.by arbt- but he had the satisfaction of believing that the House and time Maims, or on their own terms. It was urged on the one side, that country would agree in the sentiment so kindly expressed by Sir Palliaitteta initingrd rights of individuals in favour of railway emu-

James Graham. It was a great additional eonsolation to him that the palmies, on the greund that the public would be benefited by those sentiments so handsomely expressed %vela: shared by a large portion ot umalertakings ; kw,. being given to railway companies to take property, his fellow officers— the value of which might be settled or by atbitrators by a jury. It

He had had the satisfaetion of hearing from many even of those who had was now proposed that the railway companies should be compelled to been disappointed in their own promotion, that thy had not a word to say convey the mails fir the benefit of the public, the amount of compen- against the advancement Of the grandson of two Admirals. More than this sation beitig determined by arbitrators ; but the Government would be could not say. Ile had come down to the House prepared to speak upon not lay it down as a rule to guide the arbitrators that the cost of con- many points involved in the gallant Admiral's motion; but the remark of the structing the railways., which might be exorbitant, should be WTI into honourable Member for Kilkenny took hint by surprise, and he confessed he the calculation. On the other side it was maintained, that Parliament had never felt more overcome in his life. had given certain rights to the railway proprietors, which could. not be Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON asked, why, if Sons were to benefit by taken away without a gross infringement on the most sacred .rights of the merits of their fathers, the son of Commodore Bathurst, who was property; and that though it was competent to Pailiament to impose its killed at Navarino, had been overlooked? own terms on future railways, those which had already been sane- After a few words from Adalirlil ADAM and Sir Ileenv IIARDINGE, tioned by the Legislature might make their own terms with the Post. Lord IstnEs.ras: expressed his deep regret that Commodore Bath- office. At any rate, it was said, the cost of constructing railways should be taken into consideration.

n mind. The Committee was of opinion, that the railway companies might tleman publicly, in the hope that it would be borne i be compelled to convey the mails on terms to be settled by arbitration; Admiral ADAM said, that, unfortunately, Mr. Bathurst was not on amid the bill passed through theCommittee w ithout material change. a place in the list which brought him within the range of promotion; The bill passerl on Thursday, after a speech from Mr. EASTHOPE in but he should not be overlooked.

defence of the claims of railway proprietors.

Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON'S motion Was negatived. limit Raitway Comstissioar. On Wednesday, in reply to Mr. INTERNAL DISCIPLINE 01"rlIE CHURCH. LUCAS, Lord Janis/ Hestia:La mentioned, that at present there was

only one copy of the Irish Railway Commissioners' Report, but that many more were in preparation. lie would consult the Speaker as to the best manner of dist' ibuting them. The expense of a copy to every

ince before the judges of the Arches Couit in London. THE Paisoss MIA, was passed by the Commons on Tuesday, with The Bishop o Exa'rErt vehemently denounced the bill, as a a clause, proposed by Mr. LANGDALE, which secured to prisoners the f'

scandalous invasion of the tarred rights and duties of Bishops, and benefit of religious instruction by clergymen of their own communion..

rendering them the mere tools of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Time SCOTTISH SCHOOL BILL was read a third time, by a vote of He entered into an elaborate history and defence of the jurisdiction of 42 to 17, and passed. the Bishop's Diocesan Courts, and laid especial stress on the extreme THE PARLIAMENTARY SCOTTISH BERGH Btu passed, after a brief severity of summoning poor clergymen from distant parts of the discussion. eountry to the expensive court in the Metropolis. For his part, Tile REGISTRATION OF ELECTORS BILL was read a third time, and nothing should induce hint to submtt to such a law. Ile might be passed, on Tuesday.

rights and those of the Church. As for the bill itself, its provisions Posr- orrice BILL, after some opposition from Colonel Sm.

THORPE, Mr. COULLERN, Sir ROBERT PEEL, and Mr. WALLACE, Went were not understood, and no more consideration bud been given to it The Archbishop of CANTERBURY IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT BI was read a third time, and ao doubt the fate of the bill was decided. He had great reason to THE RECOVERY or TENEMENTS BILL went through the same stages. complain of the Bishop of Exeter's manner of treating the bill—the EXPEDITION TO THE PERSIAN GULF. III reply to questions by Sir entire responsibility of which the Archbishop was willing to assume; STRATFORD CANNING, Sir JOHN HozimusE, on Tuesday, said that a though of sixteen Bishop who had been consulted in framing the mea. small expedition had sailed from Bombay to the Persian Gulf— sure, only one had expressed disapprobation of it. In fact, the man- The expedition consisted of the Semiramis, a steamer, two small brigs of lit of doing business in the Eeelesiatical Courts required revision.— war, and a transport, and conveyed five hnadred Sepoys. This expedition had been sent to that quarter in consequence of a despatch received by the Governor- General of India from the Governor of Bombay, stating grounds which the Governor-General of India no doubt thought sufficient to require it. Sir Stratford Canning was, no doubt, aware that the East India Company had a resident Representative at Bushire and also at Bagdad, and that our commer- cial relations had lately considerably increased in those quarters; and it was in consequence of the present political state of Persia, that the Governor- General had deemed it necessary to send this expelition for the protection of their interests. The act was, however, entirely one of the Government of India, and did not in any way originate with the Home Government.

DEPORTATION OF INDIAN LABOURERS. Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE, being questioned on the subject by Sir ROBERT PEEL, stated, that an order would be sent to the East India Government absolutely prohibiting the transmission of Hill Coolies to the West Indies for the next three years.

IDOLATRY IN INDIA. Mr. CHAPMAN, on Wednesday, presented four petitions from Wesleyan Methodists in Whitby, against the prac- tice of allowing Christian servants of the East India Company to join in the idolatrous worship of the Hindoos.

Similar petitions were presented by Mr. Puirsearrs and Colonel SIBTHORPE. The Colonel asked whether Government intended to take into consideration the numerous petitions presented on this subject?

Mr. HUbIE wished to ask, before Colonel Sibthorpe's question was answered, whether Lord John knew of any instance in which a British officer had been compelled to join in idolatrous worship ? He had re- sided many years in India, and never knew of such an instance.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that the President of the Board of Con. trol had given such directions on the subject as he thought necessary and proper.

THE BENEFICES PLURALITY BILL was read a third time in the Lords, on Monday. On the question that the bill "do pass," Lord PORTMAN expressed his firm conviction, that, at no distant time, this measure would force upon the Right Reverend bench the whole question of Church temporalities— In as far as it went to enforce residence, he was glad of it; but he feared it would be found to be based on an unsound principle. It was a bill whose principle exhibited a total want of reciprocity in every relive& The clergy were to be prosecuted at the will if Me Bishops, awl the laity at the will of anybody, but there was 'no check upon the enormous power given to the Bishops. There was also an entire want of reciprocity in the case of the curates. All peculiars were to be abolished, except the peculiars of Arch. bishops and Bishops. Another strong objection which he had to the bill, arose from the great number of exemptions flout residence which it admitted; and he had much hesitation as to the clause which made the Archbishop a judge of the fitness of an individual to hold livings in plurality, as well as the patron and the Bishop of the respective dioceses. He hoped the Right Reverend Bench would feel it to be their duty to use the screw which this bill put into their hands, in the manner which he was sure was contemplated by the vener- able Prelate who introduced it to the House. lie felt certain that the bill would have the effect of opening the whole question of the temporalities of the Church.

No reply was made to these observations ; and the bill passed.

THE SCOTCH PRISONS BILL was " committed" be the Lords OD Thursday, by a vote of 30 to •26; the Duke of Beceissecii strongly opposing the measure. After a brief discussion in the Committee of the whole House, it was agreed to refer the bill to a Select Com- mittee.

THE INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT BILL was read a third time on Tuesday, and passed.

THE NATIONAL LOAN FUND COMPANY BILL passed on Tuesday.

THE QUADRUPLE TREATY. On Tuesday, Lord Minto being in his place, the Marquis of LONDONDERRY asked whether be adhered to his opinions respecting the Quadruple Treaty ?

Lord MINTO was happy to find that Lord Londonderry had at last discovered that the best means of obtaining an answer to a question, was by putting the question to the person from whom the answer was expected. He would now say, that notwithstanding the noble Mar- quis's very close arguments and profound reasoning and distiuguished eloquence, and all his very extraordinary and wonderful know- ledge upon all questions, still be had not been able to change his opinion; his construction of the Quadruple Treaty was still unchanged.

Lord BROUGHAM said, that if the House did not admire Lord Minto's wisdom, it must still be struck with his frankness. He now wished to know if the instructions for which be had moved would be supplied ?

The Duke of WELLINGTON said, he never wished to press Ministers for papers, which, were he Minister, he should object to produce Lord BROUGHAM admitted that the Duke's was a good rule. Per- haps, however, Lord Ana° would say whether the Order in Council alluded to was signed by himself, or by some other member of the Government in conjunction with him ?

Lord MINTO gave no direct reply. Any order that might have been given must have been signed by the Secretary of State.

Nothing of moment followed, and the conversation dropped.