NEWS OF THE WEEK.

'1.'111.: Canada Government Bill, which passed the House of Com- mons with the concurrence of the leading men of all parties—only 13ix Members testifying final disapproval by their votes—has encoun- tered unexpected opposition from the Lords. The Duke of WEL- iiNGToN could not see in the state of Canada any necessity for • immediate legislation of any kind ; and he vehemently denounced the particular measure which the Government proposed, as endan- gering the British dominion in North America. He maintained .that the consent of the Upper Canada Legislature had been im- properly procured, by means of the fiunous despatch of the 16th October 1839 ; to which also he attributed. the popular addresses 'sent to this country in favour of the Union and of Responsible ..1Government. He was for another sitting of the Legislature of

pper Canada, and a more deferential respect to the oracles tord SEATON and Sir Faawers 13oNn HEAD. The Duke pro- Iessed to take great interest in the question, and to have ;,studied it with extraordinary care. Notwithstanding, however, his very Wang c pision against it, he " entreated their Lord• ships to allolv the to go into Committee, and then to give its provisions the tidiest consideration." For himself, he-should say " Non-content" to the bill; but ho told the Lords, that "in deciding on it they must look to other opinions—to the opinions of other members of that IIouse, and of the other house of Par- liament, and not to his only ; " and then, " it' the Government thought proper to take the responsibility of the measure, in God's name let them do so."

Lord ELTANBOROUGH'S language was even stronger than the Duke's—pronouncing the measure " the most violent, the most fraudulent, and the most unjust, ever proposed to Parliament :" yet Lord ELLENITOROUGII did not* feel himself at liberty to reject the bill—he also wits willing to go into Committee. Other Peers "stated objections to the bill. Lord Ibtoucnissr temperately, but 4forcibly, showed that the consent of neither Province had been re- , gularly obtained through its representatives ; as in Lower Canada Ithere was no representative body, and Sir FRANCIS HEAD'S Upper • ;: :Canada Parliament had outlived its legal existence. He antici- pated any thing but union from the two races of English and French ,.3sitting in the same Assembly. Lord ASHBURTON spoke with good sense and knowledge of the inevitable severance of the North ,American Colonies from England, and the wisdom of timely preparation for that event. Lord MELBOURNE, who had moved the second reacting in a fbeble and slovenly manner, discreditable to his position and unworthy of the occasion, made a cleverer reply ; . and the bill was read a second time without a division. Lord HARDAvICKE has since given notice, that on Tuesday next, when the bill should go into Committee, he will move the postponement of the Committee till that day six months. This motion, we pre- sume, will not succeed: for the Duke of WELLINGTON himself is in favour of going into Committee. . What is the meaning, what the motive, of these strange demon- - strations in the House of hereditary Legislators ? Is the great Duke in earnest? Or is he not, as the Colonial Gazette suggests, acting independently of his party and clearing off old scores—iblfil- Hng some indiscreet engagement with the Family Compact people to oppose the bill which must prostrate that faction ? We incline to this opinion ; which, is supported by his Grace's acts, not in this instance consistent with his professions; for he procured for the bill, which he pronounced pregnant with mischief, the material advan- tage of a second reading without a division. The earnestness with which he disclaimed leadership, and referred the Lords to the other House, as though he feared his own opinion might be adopted, was very remarkable ; and would seem to have been prompted by a conviction that the bill must pass, but that the entire responsibility should rest with the. Queen's Ministers.

On this hypothesis we may reconcile the Duke of WELLINGTON'S speech with his character of never allowing personal or even party considerations to outweigh his sense of duty to the country. We are aware of heavy faults in the bill; which if the Lords amend, we shall be well pleased : but we have been restrained from urging objections, by a paramount sense of the importance of a legislative union in the present session—by a sincere belief that more mischief would result from another year's delay than from the most objectionable provisions of a very imperfect measure. No doubt, many Canadians of the French race will conceive them- selves harshly treated ; and a great show of Opposition, really not formidable, may be Made. It must also be admitted that the con- sent of the people of Canada has been either assumed, or irregu- larly obtained. Nevertheless, all our inlimmiation confirms the opinion, that no similar arrangement was ever made with so general a consent of the parties interested. The filet is, that the Canadian colonists arc tired of waiting—impatient of uncertainty—burning for self-government—by no means enamoured of the military sway and protection so costly to the Mother-country, and which the Duke of WELLINGTON'S soldierly predilections may induce him to think lint such a bad exchange. Again to postpone the commencement of their deliverance, would create one common feeling of disgust and disaffection in all who are now the most attached to the British connexion. The earnest hope of some measure—any better than none—pervades the active mind of Canada. At present, enterprise is crushed, commerce and agriculture languish, all arc anxious, all looking to England tbr relict'; and this state of

things would be prolonged by adopting the Duke of WELLINGTON'S advice to refer the matter back to Upper Canada. The project is so unpractical, so unstatesmanlike, and so dangerous, that we can- not believe it was ever deliberately conceived, or will be seriously supported by the Duke of WELLINGTON. Sir ROBERT INGLIS obtained the support cif a minority much larger than we anticipated for his motion in favour of " Church- extension,—in other words, his attempt to procure the sanction of

the House of Commons to a grant of some large but unnamed sum to be expended in building and endowing churches. The numbers on

the division were 168 and 149 ; but though he counted their votes, Sir Itoumun' was not comforted in his assault upon the Treasury by the countenance of the Conservative party. lie spoke for three hours, to about twenty Tories, linceis,c ‘Nhom were neither PEEL, STANLEY, nor GRAHAM ; and so eagor was the House to get. rid of the question, that More than once the debate was on the point of terminating without a syllable of reply from the Liberals. Sir ROBERT INGLTS rested his motion on allegations, that the State having established the true Church, was bound to support it

with sufficient revenues, and that money was now required to sup- ply a deficiency of spiritual instruction on the principles of the Establishment. The mutual relations of Church and State were not clearly laid down by Sir Roomer ; perhaps lie would have found it difficult to prove that the State had at any time contracted the obligation to support the Church with unlimited temporal means.

The English Church was not originally endowed by the State, although she has frequently been plundered by her Cesar : and this doctrine is keenly asserted whenever it is convenient to deny the right of the secular power to meddle with the temporalities of

the Establishment. Could it be shown that the Church was founded and endowed by the State, a virtual contract might be assumed for

increasing its revenues pare paws viih the augmentation of its

duties : but church history informs us that in early times the Church and State were in frequent conflict, and that the property of the Establishment is the result of bequests of individuals for particular purposes—that, in fact, the Establishment owes its wealth chiefly to the operation of the Voluntary principle. The claim of right is unsubstantial : whether it be politic or expedient to grant a large sum for the erection and endowment of churches, is another question, which we are not disposed to deal with as summarily as some Members who opposed the motion. It matters little whether Sir Romer INGras was correct in his calculations of the relative numbers of Churchmen and Dissenters, or in his estimate of the efficacy of the Voluntary principle, seeing that, un- deniably, in many large districts, there are neither churches nor chapels, nor religious instruction of any kind. But supposing the State bound to afford the means of religious instruction where no other provision exists, the question occurs, whether by an improved distribution of the three or four millions per annum now enjoyed by the Church, the means of greatly enlarged instruction might not be procured? Surely this should be well ascertained before asking money for new churches.

The practical consideration, however, is whether, in the existing state of public feeling, and with reference to the proportion of Dissenters to Churchmen in the Three Kingdoms—and bearing in mhld also the deficiency of revenue for secular wants—Parliament would act discreetly in granting a large sum to the Established sect. Sir ROBERT Isous felt this to be the pinching part of the question; and be shrunk from naming the amount he designed to ask for. Whatever doubts might exist on other points, we are quite clear

that the present temper of the country would render the vote of additional millions to the Church a most unsafe experiment.

In connexion with Sir ROBERT INGLIS'S motion, may be men- tioned the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Bill ; a complicated measure for remodelling some of the Cathedral establishments, and augmenting small livings with a portion of their revenues. It affects so many interests lying beyond the actual owners of pre- ferment, that Lord JOHN Russum. experiences great difficulty in getting it through the Committee ; and it is doubtful whether it can pass this session.

Another measure touching the Church has been the subject of

fierce contention in the House of Commons. We allude to the bill for applying a portion of the receipts from the tolls of the river Weaver, in Cheshire, to the erection of churches for the benefit of the " spiritually destitute" population resident on the borders of the river, and comprising workmen and their families employed in the navigation. Strong objections are made to this application of the funds by the Liberals ; whilst it is strenuously supported by large mitjorities, composed not entirely, but with few exceptions, of Tories. Mr. E. J. STANLEY leads the Opposition ; but his " whip " is not so effectual as on Government measures, and he seldom drives more than halt' of the whole number of Liberals into the House tiw the division. There may be local and special reasons for diverting the Weaver funds from their proper use, but we can- not imagine any of sufficient cogency to justify the violation of principle on which the bill is finuled. Were it proposed to build Dissenting chapels with the money, the Church party would not be slow to exclaim against the misapplication of the funds.

The progress of Lord STAm.Ey's Irish Registration Bill has

been interrupted by another long debate upon a motion of Mr. O'CONNELL to instruct the Committee to define the electoral qua- lification. The motion was defeated by the large majority of 311 to 143: but its end—delay—was gained. The perseverance in the plan of vexatious obstruction, however, is beginning to excite disgust among the Ministcrialists; and it is understood that no further opposition will be given to the motion for going into Com- mittee. The fitte of the bill is still doubtful; but Lord STANLEY'S energy may carry it through. There seems to be a majority, though a narrow one, in its thvour.