Elcbatcl ratlf Pratcainal in Patlimurnt.

1. lrswien ELECTION.

III the House of Commons, on Wednesday, Mr. P. M. SrEwAnT brought up the report of the Ipswich Election Committee ; and by the direction of the Committee, submitted the following resolutions to the House.

That the resolutions of the 11111 of April be rescinded. •• That Robert Adam Dinalas, F,o.. and Fitzroy Kelly, Esq., are not dulv elected, and ,e1.711t not to have been returned to seine in the present Parliament for the borough of ; That the petition of Robert Ransom and others does not appear to have been fri- volous Or vexations. " That t he opposition to the said petition does appear to be ft ivolims awl vexatious. " That Mr. John Drown and Minns had been struck off the roll, it having been pros cd that tiles were not entitled to vote.

'"fliai Robert Adam Pinatas awl I' uteri Kelly, Esqrs., were. by their friends and agents. guilty of bribery and et rrupt ion lit the late election for the borough of Ips-

m ; and that Arthur Robert Cooke, J. IL Dasent, John Pilgri m,aud others, were guilty of bribery at the said elect jilt. " That J. IL Dasent, A. II, Cooke, It. 11. Clamp. and John Pilgrim. were guilty of

abwontling to avoid being served w dm Speaker s warrant ; and t bat J. E. sparrow and John Clipperton. I he tvowed agents of the sitting Menibers,and P. O'Malley Esq., IMMO of the Counsel employed by the sitting Members, aided awl abetted them in keep. ing out of Oh.' way to avoid giviag rwidenee before this Committee. " That the said John Pilgrim Inning at length Leen served with the Speaber's war- rant, was prevented attending on this Committee by being orre.ted on a charge of end ker. zlement by Mrs. Sew ell and I Rake under s ery suspicious circumstances. " That the conduct iti the Nlagisnsates, Samuel Itignold, Esq. and E. Temple Booth. Esq., berme whom he was charged, appears to this Committee lobe a breach of the privileges of the Doust."

Mr. GISBORNE moved that Dasent, Cooke, and Clamp, be taken into custody ; that Bignold mid Booth be also taken into cus- tody ' - and that Sewell and Blake be summoned to attend at the bar of the [louse. He had a precedent for his motion

lie meant that of Penryn; in which Mr. Leigh Keck, who was die Chair- man of the Committee who sat upon that election, reported, that John Stanhury, Laving been summoned to attend to give evidence before the Committee, had not attended, and that it appeared he had absconded, and he therefore moved that John Stanbury be taken into custody, and that the Speaker do issue his warrant to that effect, lie suggested that in the present case the same coinso should he pursued by the house that bad been pursued in the case of Penryn. Vitt' respect to one class of the offendels—he meant those who had absconded in order that they alight not be called upon to give their evidence before the Committee—the difference between the case of Penryn and the present case was extremely slight. The only difference was, that in the Penryn case John Stan- bury had been served with the Speaker's warrant, and had afterwards ab- sconded ; but in the case now under consideration. ,l. B. Dasent, A. H. Cooke, B. B. Clamp, am! John Pilgrim had been guilty, as appeared from the report Tile& by the Committee, of having absconded in order to avoid being served with the Speaker's warrant. Ile did not suppose that the House would consi- der that the offence committed by the offenders in the present case was less than that committed by Stanbury. It would not be considered a less offence to have successfully avoided the Speaker's warrant, than to have absconded after having been served with it.

Alr. STEwawr moved that the minutes of evidence be laid on the table. He also said, that to call the Magistrates to account was a little premature.

Mr. GISBORNE said, he would move that O'Malley, Sparrow, and Clipperton, should be taken into custody.

Mr. ROEBUCK asked, why the sitting Members were not included in Mr. Gisborne's motion ?

Mr. GISBORNE was inclined strictly to follow precedents.

The SPEAKER then put the question, that the minutes of evidence be laid on the table.

CaEssErr PELHAM highly approved of the course taken by Osborne.

ham desultory conversation ensued respecting the propriety of g a copy of Mr. Kelly's speech in defence laid before the House. Sir ROBERT PEEL then opposed the mode of proceeding which Mr. Gisborne had adopted-- He thought that the House ought not to exercise its authority in ordering these persons into custody, without due consideration. The case of Stanbury, which had been alluded to, was different inns the present. Stanbury bad been served with the Speaker's warrant to attend, and had afterwards absconded. Surely the House would not say that the wituesses in the present case, who hail never been served with the warrant, were upon the same footing with a person who had been served with the Speaker's warrant, and who had absconded in mder that he might not be forced to obey it. At least, before the House came to the resolution which involved the loss of liberty to the persons implicated, it ought to have some evidence before it to show under what circumstances the act of absconding had taken place. Was it certain that avoiding a Speaker's warrant was punishable? All that he asked was, that the House would give time for the consideration of the subject, and that it should not act upon the report of any Committee, but upon evidence before it, as to the guilt of parties, and the degree of punishment to which they should be subjected.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL spoke in favour, and Sir Wit.t.ram FOLLETT against, 31r. Gishoroe's intended motion. Sir William Follett especially demanded time to examine the evidence. Alr. O'CONNELL NVILF in favour of Mr. Gisborne's proposition. Lord JOHN Ruses:us suggested that the discussion of the question should be adjourned, that the prece- dents alight be searched.

Mr. STEwatcr's motion was carried ; and then Mr. GISLORNE moved that A. B. Cooke, IL B. Clamp, J. E. Sparrow, J. Clipperton, and F. haviog been guilty of bribery at the last Ipswich elec- tion, be taken into the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms.

Mr. CRESSETT PELusiu supported the motion. He felt obliged to Mr. Gisborne for the course he had taken.

Sir Homer PLEt. was aware that he was pursuing a somewhat un- popular line of proceeding, but still he would not hesitate to perform his duty They were called upon to act in a judicial capacity—to issue a warrant for depriving persons of their liberty, on the expiess assumption of their guilt. The express ground of arrest was assigned in the motion. Although be ad- mitted they were not bound to act according to the technical rules of evi- dence acted upon in the courts of law, still it was their day, before they deprived a person of his liberty, to get the best evidence they could of the conduct of the person. Do) not let them blast the characters of these men, without heimg perfectly satisfied of their guilt. (" Oh, ! ") Ile was, then, evidently speak- hug in the presence of some gentlemen who thought lightly of assuming a person guilty without hearing him in his defence. As far as the motion went, they were about to inflict punishment, not after looking to the evidence, but at the advice of some persons who were present, who heard the evidence. The Committe;: did not advise the Chairman to bring this subject forward. He therefore did nut think that he was asking much of the honourable Member for Derbyshire, in requesting him to abstain from calling upon the House to come to a decision fur twetity-four hours.

Lord JOHN ItcssEm, moved the adjournment of the debate to the next day.

Sergeant WILDE strongly supported Mr. Gisborne's motion; he ob- jected to tardiness or postponement.

The debate was then adjourned.

On Thursday, the discussion was resumed by Mr. GISBORNE ; who altered his motion to the following- " That John Bury Dasent, Esq., John Bond, Arthur Bott Cooke, Robea Burchamp Clamp, John Pilgrim, Frederick O'Malley, Esq., Juhn Eddowes Sparrow', and John Clipperton, be taken into the custody of the Sergeant -at- Arms attending the house; and that Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant accord- ingly." In support of his motion, Mr. Gisborne produced a precedent which occurred in the Camelford case. It appeared that William Hallett was taken into custody, and reprimanded by the late Speaker, for absconding with a view to escape the service of the Speaker's war- rant to give evidence before the Camelford Election Committee.

After a desultory and dry,discussion, in which it was generally ad- mitted that the case cited by Mr. Gisborne was to the point, the motion was carried.

Mr. CrISCORNE said, he should wait until he had read the evidence before he took any further steps against the Magistrates and solicitors of Norwich.

Last night, John Bury Dasent was reported to be in custody, by the Sergeant.at-Arms ; and Mr. GISBORNE presented a petition from him, requesting lenient treatment. He admitted that he had absconded to avoid giving evidence before the Committee, as be found that his evi- dence would he prejudicial to Drunks and Kelly; but be had not done this in compliance with any wish expressed by these gentlemen. Upon hearing from Mr. Kelly that his evidence would be wanted, he went before the Committee and gave it ; and he referred to any member of file Committee to speak as to the manner in which his evidence had been given.

Mr. I'. M. STEWART wished Mr. Dasent to be discharged : his ease was different from that of the other absconding parties, and his discharge would be very agreeable to the Committee.

Mr. CAMPBELL and Mr. CHAPMAN also wished Mr. Dasent to be leniently dealt with. Mr. AGLIONBY, Lord JOHN RUSSELL, and Lord STANLEY, thought that Mr. Dasent had not improved his case by his petition. It an-

peered that hhave e had absconded when his evidence would h benefited the petitioners, and only came before the Committee when he could aid the sitting Members.

Mr. P. M. STEWART moved that Mr. Dasent be reprimanded, and discharged. Alr. O'CONNELL hoped that the proceedings would be postponed, and the case sifted to the bottom.

Dr. LUSHINGTON said the country would be disgusted if leniency were shown in this case.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL would not separate Mr. Dasent's case from that of the other absconding witnesses. Mr. STEWART'S motion was negatived ; and the prisoner was ordered to be brought up on Monday.

2. PUBLIC CHARITIES.

Mr. HanrEY, on Thursday, moved for a Committee to inquire into the state of public charities in Eng7and ufel Wales. He referred to the labours of the Charit able Commissioners which commenced in ISIS ; since which time, they had published twenty-four volumes of Reports, the last of th m containiug r•00 pages. The Commission had cost the country a pewter of a million ; and Mr. Harvey thought it was desirable that their labours should be turned to some account. He then proceeded to detail umneroue instances of the gross misap- plication of funds. Ile referred particniarly to the Huntinedon charity. Long prior to the year )818, that charity is ad been broeght untrer the consideration of the Court Of Chancery. It might be suppoeed, that the notice v•hich had been taken in Parliatmint of the proceedings had somewhat accelerated them. What was the re snit? At this nriment the case was to be found in the Master's office. Be would next refer to the Poeklington charity ; the niginal giant of which, for the instruction of the poor boys, amounted to the small sum of 11. -Is. hid. The value of the property in question had inerNised to upwards of MO/. a year, nnd it had been claimed that the boys should have a more sui•able provision made for them. The Trustees, however, whose intant was the education of the people, were net less alive to their own interest, conteuded that the miserable sum of 11. 48. 10d. was all that the Pocklingtou buys should still receive. The rest wae appropriated by the Fellows of the College. An ap- peal had been made to the Court of Chancery; a deed was pleadiel, and a de- tourer allowed ; consequently, the College of St. Jam Cando idge—the learned divines who would not suffer false sentiments of humanity to give interpreta- tion to a question of law—enjoyed the WO/. a year, but were quite ready to receive into their arms any lad who should apply for admission, thinking that he could manage to defray his yearly expenses out of the H. 4s. hod.

After mentioning several similar cases, Mr. Harvey stated, that the Commissioners had inquired into 28,485 charities. In twenty-four comities, the income belonging to charitable institutions arising front land and houses, was nn11,70:3/. per annum while there were mortgages, money in the funds, and other securities belonging to them, amounting to the vast sum of -2,1n2S,030/. 'Middlesex was not one of these twenty- four counties. He calculated that the anmunt of property in strict con- nexion with charities was little short of five millions sterling. Mr. Harvey then dwelt upon the waste of the funds of these institutions in law proceedings, and gave accounts of the progress of some trials, and their cost, to prove how touch was misappropriated in this way. Ile proposed that, to remedy these evils, a permanent Committee of Public Instruction should be appointed, presided over by some digni- tary of the law.

No expense need be incurred by any arrangement to this effect. They had now three ex•Chaneellors, in the full .vi,.,our and zeal of their intellect. He remembered the time when Mr. Brougham, then a distinguished ornament of that [louse, had attached such importance to this inquiry, and to the tight ap- plication of the funds in question, that he uttered to give up his seat in the liouse in order that he might be enabled to further the objects of the inquiry. Mr. Harvey could not fine.), any thin,* more grateful to one who was in the re- ceipt of 56!1/. a year after being Crianeellor for four years, than the necessity of giv in hi; superintendence to an inquiry of the kind is question. Theo there was no doubt that in the great work of benevolence Lord Lyndhurst might aid ; and lest any difficulty might arise from the prevalence of irritable feelings, there would step in the benignant temperament of Sir Edward Sugden.

Mr. Witans seconded the motion. It was approved of by Lord

Jolts; Moos= and Sir Joitx CAMPBELL; and agreed to by the Honse, 22CM. Colt.

3. GRANT OF MONEY TO THE Seorcil CHURCH. Sir WILLIA31 RAE, on Thursday, moved " That the petitions presented to the House relative to the building and en- dowing of places of worship connected with the Established Church of Scot- land, be referred to a Select Committee • awl that such Committee shall in- quire and report how far the building and endowing such places el worship is required for the moral and religious instruction of the lower orders of the people in Scotland."

Sir William (who was very indistinctly heard) supported his motion on the ground of the vast number of petitions presented for the in- crease of Church accommodation on Scotland. He also stated, that

the rapid growth of crime in that country was the consequence of the deficiency of church-room.

PRINGT-E seconded the motion.

Lord Advocate Alermtv opposed it. Petitions signed by 79,000 persons had been presented to the House against the proposed grant. These petitions came from persons not differing in doctrine or morality, but merely from the members of the Church of Scotland in some points of Church sovernment. They urged the House not to make such a grant as was asked tor, as it would be roost unjust to them, and injurious to their feelings. Now when the question was so divided as this was, could the House decide as to the want of accommodation in the churches, and as to the other points alleged by Sir William Rae ? He would take one of the petitions presented by Mr. Pringle—this was signed by 200 persons ; while there was another petition on the table which denied all the allegations in the first petition., and this was signed by 600 persons. How could the House determine which of these peti- tions was right ?

It was stated that the members of the Establishment were a very numerous body. But he would ask, whether the members of the Establishment were not ouite as wealthy as the Dissenters, and therefore quite as able to provide places of worship as the latter class of persons? Would it not be felt as it great griev- ance by the Dissenters that a grant of the public money should be given to the Establishment ? If the whole of the money in the public purse belonged to the Church of Scotland, then there might not be so strong an objection to the grant : but as long as the conscientious feelings of others were involved, and those having rendered important service to religion, he thought that the House was bound to attend to their feelings, and not call upon them to contribute their money. They supported their own form of religious worship which differed only in church government, not in doctrine, from the Church- of Scot- Juan; and it would be bard to make them contribute also to the latter.

He proposed as an amendment,

" That an humble address be presented to his Majesty, praying that he will be graciously. pleased to appoint a Commission to inquire into the opp or- tunity of religious worship, and into the means of religious instruction, afforded to the people of Scotland, and especially to the poorer classes of the commu- nity, whetoe: they belong to the Established Church, or be of any other religious persnasion; and into the state of the law for repairing or building churches; and 5nto the funds which may now be, or which may hereafter become, applicable to that purpose." Sir GEORGE CLERK was disappointed by Mr. Murray's speech. He zeal iaded the House, that the subject before the House, was one of the

topics in the King's Speech at the opening of the st silent, and that Sir Robert Peel had intended to act upon the suggestion.

He regretted the tone of the learned lord respecting the Established Church of Scotlaud ; for the tone of his argument was fatal to the existence of all esta- blishments. It had been said that meeting-houses had been built hy Dissenters in Scotland ; but, however praiseworthy might be the efforts of individuals, they did not absolve the State front the obligation of providing adequate means of worship for the people. Ile remembered in argument of Dr. Lushington, when grants for building of churches were opposed on that ground : he had said, that it WO not to be endured that members of the Church of England were to be indebted to Dissenters for Ow means of public worship; and the smile argument applied to the Church of Scotland. lie objected to this new mode of governing the country by meamms of commissions. If ,m commission of inquim y condUcted without party -spirit, he did not decry it ; but, could* Mr. Murray's speech with the 'within to which it lcd, Inc cot! Id draw no other inference than that it was intended to hang up the question for a number of years.

Mr. Cc TI.Alt itnrssoN was in favour of the grant ; apparently for this reason, that " the county tvhich he represeanol was unanimous in its favour."

He should vote, however, in ffivour of time amendment ; rot for the purpose of throwing cold water on the snhirct, but is 6me farts of the case were disputed, they must be decided to the sr.tisfietion ot the country ; and he was convinced that they could not be so decided by means of a Committee of the !louse of CU/U- nions. Ile thought that the appointment of it Contuais,ion would be it better anode of arriving at the truth.

3Ir. WALI.xcE supporfed Co: nwrdment-- There existed a great deli of property ncothaul belonging, to the Church, which might be made available for Chereh purneses. A great potion of the teinds, or tithes, wet e unapprOilli:OTAL Ile possessed some property of that kind in two parishes, and he should disdain to pet his hands into the public purse until those tenets were exhausted. ( Cheers.) Mr. xvould not assist the Church of Scotland with public: money to put down the Dissenters, and would oppose the motion. The debate was then adjourned to Monday.

4. ORANGE CHARGES AGAIN ',T MneisTiann Lord CaFertnenoc in on Wednesday, called the attention of the House of Commons to the petition agreed to et the great Protestant meeting in Down on the rl•nli of Ootober IS3I. llis Lordship, after dwelling on the importance of the petition, and the wt :AO, influence, and cumbers of those viio attended the at cm erned the Govern- ment with Bawl:ling to Mr. 0' Ciomell, and allowing him in point of fact to inake the Irish appointments.

The srl:An tat suggested the propriety of avoiding irregular discus-. shins on petitions. Lord CA:ennui:Ann urged the vast importance of the petition he had presented, as an arology for his speech. Lord Moe rum would reserve what he had to say on the petition, if the House coincided with the Speaker. ( Cries ty. " Co on ! ") Lord Alonemt was proceeding to address the Douse, when there was a call for— Mr. SHARMAN Cr,.‘wronn; who at sonic length exposed the manner in which the petition had been got up, and denied that it could be fairly taken as the exponent of the opinions even of the Protestants of Down.

Mr. OTONNLLL and Lord Moarrmr rose together ; but the latter gave way, as Ale. O'CoNxEr.r, complained of having been personally assailed by Lord Castlereagh. lie utterly denied the truth of the as- sertion that he had any thing to do with the Ministerial appointments : if he had, they would perhaps have been better. Such arguments and assertions as those of Lord Castlereagh were absurd- " I do not (he continued) mean any personal disrespect when I say so, but they are unbecoming the character of a legislator, and, Heaven bless the mark! of a stateonan, which is the rank to which the noble lord aspires. Then it is said, that all the recent appointments have been made by me. The late Secretary for the Ordnance (Colonel Pereeval) cheers me : I am sure I had as much to do with the recent appointments as I had with his appointment. Ile throws up his head int that : I am certainly very glad that Inc has ceased to till that office, not from any personal dislike, hut because it is symptomatic of a change of party. I deny that any office in the present Ministry, or connected with it, was filled at my instance or at any suggestion, or that I land the slightest in- fluence in the matter. I am sorry that .1 had not : I think that some of the places would have been better tilled if I had ; at all events there would have been a ditn.rence, though I do not mean to quarrel with what has been done. With respect to the late Solicitor-General, for instance, I think he had a fair claim to have been made Attorney-General, but the Government derided otherwise, and I acquiesced. ("Hear !" ) I acquiesced, precisely as the late Secretary for the Ord- name acquiesced in his own dismissal—he could not help it. He submitted with all due humility and walked out of his office: he was no doubt the bestof all pos- sible Secretaries, could he but have persuaded people to take his word for it ; but as they would not, he took up his hat and walked. After all, nothing can be so disreputable to party, as an indulgence in this sort of idle ribaldry. Let those who say the appointments were at my instance, show me a bad appointment. Look at the Irish Law Officers of the Crown : is the appointment of the Attorney- General a bad appointment ? Was be not at the head of his profession before he had any connexion with the Government? Did be ever distinguish himself by partisanship ? (lid he ever do more in that way than putting his hand to a petition that the people of Ireland might all be on an equality? He was no agitator—no public declaimer he maintained the integrity of Ins own opinions, and year after year felt the weight of exclusion : he ought to have been At- torney-General long since ; and I will add, that be would be an ornament to the highest dignity in the profession. What objeethm can be made to the Soli- citor-General ? Is he not qualified ? Has Inc not risen to the first business, though belonging to a class proscribed? Ile has risen by the force of his own talents; and the amiability of his dispositition has compelled men of all parties to feel a regard for him in private life. Not being able to impeach the appoint- ments, they throw them upon me : but, as I before said, this ia too bad, coming from the noble lord."

Nothing could be more improper than the Down meeting- " It was called by Lord Hillsborough, the high Sheriff of the county ; but he had no right to summon any particular sect. If he calls the Protestants to-day, he may call the Catholics to -morrow, and the Presbyterians and Seceders the next ddy. Be constituted himself, not the Sheriff of a county, but the Sheriff of a party, a partisan Sheriff. And, sacred Ileaven! let it never be forgotten, that thie man has the nomination of the Grand Juries—that he makes out the panel of the Petty Juries : and are not the complaints of the Roman Catholics well-founded, when they say, that with such a Sheriff, and such Magistrates, they have not a chance of justice—that their lives will be the sport of their enemies—that their properties will be at the merry of partisans? If the effect do not follow, does not the sense of insecurity, the fear that the temple of justice will be polluted—that the scalea will be not held with an even hand—that one party will be made to outweigh the other—produce a constant feeling of irrita- tion and discontent ? The Roman Catholics are warranted in these fears, when the High Sheriff summons one portion of the population of his bailiwick to the total exclusion of the rest. That is the Sheriff's notion of loyalty : people are loyal as long as they support a certain party in their undue aseendaucy—as long as they are allowed to raise one body and to crush another !"

Lord MORPETII, Sir R. BATESON, Mr. RONAYNE, and Colonel VERNER, addressed the house, the latter amidst much interruption ; and the petition was laid on the table.

5. Tin: CATHOLIC OATIL

Mr. ORMSBY GORE, on Thursday, presented a petition from Os- westry, praying for such an alteration in the Catholic Members' oath, as would prevent them from voting on questions connected with the Church.

Mr. SHIM. wished the question to be settled by the House— Sir Robert Inglis had given notice of a motion when the Irish Tithe Bill :should he introduced, which would offer to the Boman Catholic 31em11e1s of the ilouse a direct affront. Let him takt: a better course. Let him bring in a bill. Sir Robert put one interpretation on the oath, the Homan Catholic Mem- bers another : what right had the filmier to take his seat in the chair of infalli- bility, and charge the Boman Catholic Members with perjury? The first !Wern- her who bad broached this question was the Munber for St. Andrew's: Mr. Sheil wished that that gentleman would explain his pledge as strictly as he wished to interpret the oath of the Boman Catholic :Members. ( cheers.)

did he not leave the oath to the consciences of the Roman Catholic Mem- bers, as they left his pledge to his conscience?

Mr. JOHNSTON said he (lid not admire the taste of Mr. Shell, who bad mixed up with this grave question a matter regarding the pledge Ile was supposed to have given to his constituents. Ile had already offered to meet that subject, and to furnish a PI vindication: but it was refused. Ile declared that he would not sit in the House hmyer than he could occupy his place with honour and credit

Mr. O'Coxstass reminded the House, that in a former session he bad moved for leave to bring in a bill to alter the oath; but that the House, with Lord Althorp for its leader, had almost unanimously des dared it to be unnecessary.

The petition stated, that the Roman Catholic Members swore, on taking their seats, that they would not avail themselves of any privilege in order to weaken the Protestant religion. First, it was necessary distinctly to understand what privilege was. Did the right to sit and vote conic within the meaning of the word " privilege ?" That was not its legal interpretation. As a lawyer he was quite clear upon that point ; but if the !louse thought otherwise, let it be brought to a decision. The petitioners went on to argue that the Boman Ca- tholic Members ought not to vote to lessen the revenms of the Church. That was as much as to say, that revenue :Ind religion were synonymous terms. If so, he admitted that the Roman Catholic 31embers did not observe the oath. They contended, however, that religion was one thing and revenue another. The one emanated from God ; the other was tainted with the 31aninion of tbe world. lie put it thus —Wouldthe Protestant religion he at an end if the Church were deprived of its entire avenues? ( ers.) Was that meant to be contended ? If it were, what a triumph did the Prokstants give to those whom they called Papists. lint they could not mean that the Protestant reli- Fion meant pounds, shillings, and pence. When the Roman Catholic religion in Ireland was deprived of its revenues, it 41i.1 not dialini-Ir the quantity of reli- gion there. This was the distinction on which he ,tool—that religion was not revenue, nor revenue religion. Were a question to an on the Thirty-nine Articles, and were it proposed in Parliament, as in America, to cut them down to nineteen articles, he should not vote upon it ; but on a matter rylati:Ig merely to the revenues of the Church, he said at Mee what all sincere religionists would say, that religion was only encumbered by revenue. What had been the re- venue of the Church for the first three Inindred years? Bevenue and religion were not combined then, and they were not combined now. Ile therefore laughed to scorn all those who said he was rittacking religion because he wished to relieve his constituents from an unholy and an unchristian burden. There. solution passed by the House only declared that the surplus should be applied to tl.e purposes of education, after providing for all the spiritual wants of the people. Was there any thing in religion beyond spiritual wants? Yes. There was a trifle in things that did not belong to the altar, but were about it. It had been well said by Dr. Bo ton, that by not supporting the Church the Protestant Aristocracy was slaughtering their milch-row, since the Church provided livings for all their younger children. If religion and revenue were separate, the Roman Catholic Members could take and keep their oath with a clear con- science—with rer feet fidelity ; and he would not say they laughed to scorn their opponents, but dared them to introduce a bill to put a different interpretation on the oath. If they did not du it, he would : he had tried it before, and would try it again.

After some remarks from Mr. Goar, the petition was laid on the table.

6. COMMUTATION OF TAXES.

Mr. Rows:sox moved, last night, for a Committee to inquire into the expediency of repealing certain taxes which pressed unequally on

the productive classes, and substituting others less objectionable. He complained of the thin state of the House, and of the little attention

bestowed on the subject. [he reminded Ministers, that in Opposi- tion they had supported a motion by Mr. Poulett Thomson, in 1830, similar to that which Inc now proposed ; and quoted passages from the speeches of Mr. Ihiskisson and Mr. Poilett Thomson in support of Ids views. Ile maintained the necessity of making certain property— money in the Funds, for instance—liable to contribute to the support of the State ; and said that the Eundholder had profited greatly by the alteration in the currency. Mr. Robinson concluded his speech by advo. eating the imposition of a Property-tax, and the repeal of those taxes which pressed on the productive industry of the country.

The motion was opposed by Mr. Seam: Rua: and Mr. Porsvisr THOMPSON; on the ground of the great unpopularity of the Property.. tax, and the injustice of taxing the Fundbolder, which would be a breach of faith. It should morever be distinctly declared, whether an income-tax or a property-tax was intended. Since Mr. Poulett Thom- son's motion in 1830, the duties on many of the articles which he re- presented as injurious to trade had been reduced or abolished: among them, were hemp, barilla, sea-borne coals, printed calico, and soap. An attempt had been made to reduce the timber-duties, but the House bad overruled it. There was, however, at present a Committee sitting on the timber-duties. A strong objection to the motion was, its tendency to throw trade into uncertainty, and cripple the operations of commercial men. It was much better that Ministers should make up their minds Oil measures relative to the imposition or reduction of tuxes, and state them at once to the House.

Mr. PEASE, Mr. HAWES, Mr. G. F. YOUNG, and Mr. GOULLURN, briefly addressed the House ; the three former in favour of the latter in opposition to Mr. Robinson's motion. The motion was then negatived, by 103 to

7. MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.

The House went into a Committee of supply last night, and voted a considerable sum of money on the Miscellaneous Estimates.

Mr. T. F. BARING moved for 7,663/. to defray the charge of finish. ing the interior of Whitehall.

Mr. WARBURTON said, it was exceedingly had taste to convert what Logo Jones had intended for a banqueting-hall into it place of worship. Any one who saw Verrio's paintings, must be aware that the hall was not fit for a chapel.

Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET wished the sum proposed had been larger ; for then more ornamental improvements would have been made. The chapel had been lately shut up, and that was a great inconvenience to the respectable inhabitants of the vicinity. •

Major BEAUCLERK said, that as the chapel was to be fitted up out of the public money, he would suggest that half of it should be devoted to free seats for the benefit of the poor. (Cheers.)

Mr• BARING quite agreed in the principle involved in Major Beau- clerk's suggestion ; and promised that, if the House svould leave the matter in his hands, a proper proportion of free seats should be re- served.

The vote was finally agreed to, by 116 to 24.

It was then proposed that 44,0001. should be granted for providing temporary accommodation for the two Houses of Parliament. Mr. H. B. CURTEIS objected to the charge, as enormous.

Mr. BARING said, the estimate for the building was osdy 30,600/., the remainder being for furniture, and other necessary articles.

Mr. CURTEIS said, the charge for furniture was scandalously extra- vagant— The country was called upon to pay upwards of 10,000/. for nothing but a parcel of deal tables and a few rusty old chairs. Ile would undertake to prove that the whole of the furniture never cost so much as 2,0004 Mr. BARING replied, that the accounts would show that the charges were not extravagant.

Mr. FRENCH remarked, that the present Government was rot to blame for the charges.

Mr. TULK reminded the House, that the people of Birmingham bad erected a splendid and magnificent building for 2,0001.

The vote was passed.

Among other sums, it was moved to grant 2006/. towards paying the salaries of certain professors at Oxford and Cambridge. several Members objected to this, on the ground of Dissenters being excluded from the Universities ; but it was carried, by SG to 3.

MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

GREAT WESTERN n.m.wAy BILL. The second reading of this bill was moved in the House oh' Peers on Wednesday, by Lord WHABN- CLIFFE. It was opposed by the Duke of Buccsructi ; principally ea the ground that the Provost and Fellows of Eton College were ex- ceedingly averse to the bill ; and that another line of road have been selected, which would in every respect have been preferable to that resolved upon by the projectors of the railway. The Earl of R Anson was in favour of the bill ; which Lords CAIINAI:VON and MALMESBURY opposed.. The second reading, however, was carried by a majority of ,46 to 34. [This was an unusually full House: their Lordships have generally mustered to the number of six or seven this session. The Chr,t;c1, states that the Western Railway Bill would have been rejected by 4S to 46, if Lord WIIARNCLIFFE had not succeeded in procuring, the exclu- sion of proxies on the division.] SUNDAY TRAVELLING ON RAILROADS• OR Thursday, the bishop of •HEREFORD, on the motion for the third reading of the Newcastle and Selby Railway Bill, moved a clause to prevent Sunday travelling on the Railway, in pursuance of an agreement entered into by tine Compauy with Messrs. Bacon Gray and Graham, two proprietors on the line o: road, who had withdrawn their opposition to the bill on the condition that locomotive engines should not run upon the railway on the Sabbath. Lord WALLACE, the Duke of RICHMOND, and Lord WitaaNcsistr, strongly opposed the motion. Lord WALLACE said— It appeared to him, that of all persons upon earth, Mr. Bacon Gray aril Mr. Graham had put it out of their power to mention the contract to which the Bishop of Hereford had referred. This railway extended to about bis!y miles, on fifty. nine of which die consent of every landowner hail been id:tail:cf. Any breach of faith was out of the question ; for Mr. Gray had agreed forego the original condition of excluding the use of locomotive engines, sideration sf receiving 3,000/., which lead been paid to him. The terms et this agreement were, that he would withdraw his opposition to the bill upon condition that the Company should not draw coals, or any other equally offen- sive article. This was the only condition. But to show that Sunday travel- ling was not included in the condition, it was only necessary to state, that the agreement reserved to Mr. Gray and others the right to propose a clause ta prevent Sunday travelling; but it at the same time reserved to the Company an equal night to oppose any such clause.

Lord WitAnset.reer was utterly opposed to restraining by legislative enacttnent the enjoyments of the labouring classes on Sunday.

The Bishop of LONDON thought that, in consistency with his merit, the Duke of Richmond oughteto support a measure for incr.:ss- ing steam-coaches on a Sunday. He was himself opposed to any mica-, sure which did not press equally on rich and poor, and would never ce.ass to raise his voice against the awful violation of the Sabbath by the rich.

The House divided; and rejected the clause, by 40 to 19.

Cons:-Laws. Earl FITZWILLIAM, on presenting a petition, on Thursday, from Auclitermuchty in Scotland, for an alteration the Corn-laws, took occasion to say that he had not given up the subject ,

and referred to the present low price of wheat as a proof of their in- efficico ey.

Lord MALMESBURY said, that if a reaction did not take place, the agriculturist would be ruined— Their object was only to obtain a fair remuneration to the land-occupiers, not to the landlords, considering how disproportionate their burdens were. Without this law, when the markets returned tu a healthy state, there would be an overflow of foreign coru, not from the Continent, but poured in at once from the avarehouses of this cottony. He had never contended for an exorbi- tant, hat a tennnwrating price.

Lord Booi•GlIANI asked %slat was a remunerative. price ?

Lord Asti et•teron thought that the present Con •laws did not give a greater protection to the former than .55x. a quarter ; which he conceived to he the happiest bit that had ever been made lee the Legislature to adjust this great and difficult question.

Loan GOSFORD'S APPOINTMENT. The Earl of Antatoo.o, last night, in moving for a copy of Lord Gosford's appointment to the Go- vernment of Canada, entend into some explanation of the policy of the last "%hoist; y ill regard to Canada, which he represented to have been very conciliatory. Lord Garaeraor defended the measures of, the present Iioveroment ; and accounted for the delay which had taken place in sentliog out a new Governor, by the necessity he was under of making hiaself acquainted with the subject in all itabearhigs. It was also hut iineo r to hear the representations of the delegates sent to this country from Canada, before final instructions were given.

The motion was withdrawn.

Saavea ant: Martartes. Last night, Lord Moto-oast' asked

if it were true thot certain slave-holders in the Mauritius, who had imported great numbers of slaves in violation of the law, were HOW to receive compensation for them out of the twenty million grant ? Were they to be rewarded for what in fact were piratical :tots? Lord MELBOURNE replied, t hat in most cases, it was impossible to d is- tineu isit the slaves who were imported illegally, Isom those for wheel CO mpensation might fairly be claimed. The Commissioners Joust

settler the trotter as well as they could.

Io the House of ComniOnS, Sir G clic r: GREY replied, to the same Effect, to it similar question from Mr. Bux-ros.

SAVIN(;', 13a7sKs. A cons-creation arose in the House of Peers, CM T11::I,dfty, as to the responsibility of the Trustees of Savings Banks. The Marquis of So osBURY referred to the late defalcatMn in the funds of a FaN'ing,; honk in 1 lertftwdshire, owing to the disitone•ty of one of its officers ; and he said It he and Lord MciatouRNE, and their bro• titer Trustees, were liable to make good the deficiency to the depositors to th extent of !Wrist/. Trustees would certainly withdraw from this resoceoihility; and the Marquis wished to know whether 'Ministers were plop; red with any measure to secure them ageinst losses arising from the dishonesty of agents ?

Lon' Meanoutton did not think it wise to legislate on this single instance, and was averse to alarming trustees by the discussion of the subject.

Lord BROUGHAM Was exceedingly glad to find that the Trustees were such undoubtedly solvent men.

Lord Soosouav said, they were only responsible for 10,0001.—part of the loss.

Lord Bnouenam regretted that they were only responsible for that

sum : the depositors would hove been equally side had the amount been 10:1,000e

Lord DENMAN said, that the Trustees could not get rid of their re- sponsibility by withdrawing, as far as related to monies paid in during their trusteeship.

Lord Wroclaw hoped that the Hertfordshire Bank Trustees would be found liable for the whole of the loss sustained.

The Marquis of SALISBURY was exceedingly obliged to Lord Wick- low; and the conversation was dropped.

Loop Boom:atom's Pro:moor. Last night, Lord BROUGHAM COM-

plained of the attacks upon him by eel fain parties for receiving a pen- sion ; which had been stated at 15,000/. instead of 5000/. a year.

It was said that he gave up nothing for it. Now he gave up a larger, a much larg, r income. lie was ready to takethese parties strictly at their word ; and if these excellent persons %von@ send up a bill enabling him to have again what he had given up--his practice at the bar, he should—he meant it not of- fensively to their Lordships, whose good-will and favour he WaS alwars anxious to conciliate, however unfortunate be might have been in his attempt—be the first person to second such a bill, and further it in its progress through that House. These persons—these very persons, who, when he made an offer to take upoa himself a most laborious office iu order to save the pension—these very persons were those who, by the clamour they raised!, drove him, against his better judgment, to retract the offer he had mada lie said at the tone- " Now mark what will follow • these very persons who raise this clamour will he the first to complain of me lor having a pension." They were the first pet- er/Ds to do so.

Lord Brougham added, that he was not altogether idle, as he spent six or seven hours a day in attending to the judicial business of the House of Peers.

REPEAL OF THE WINDOW.TAN. In the House of Commons, on Thursday, a motion by Sir S. Witaaaas• to repeal the Window-tax, was opposed by Mr. SPRING RICE, CO101101 EVANS, Dr. LUSUINGTON, and Captain Pecuaro.; Mr. T. Arrw000 supported it. The House re- jected the motion, by '204 to 16.

MERCHANT SEAMEN'S ENLISTMENT BILL. Sir JAMES GRAHAM, on Wednesday, postponed the second reading of this bill to Wednesday

next ; after a declaration by Lord Jolts: Russata , that, in the opinion (if Ministers, it should be considerably altered, although they agreed with Sir James, in opposition to Mr. Buckingham, that it was proper to de

dare by statute the right of the King to impress seamen- in easeof a- declaration of war.

IRISH TITHE Btu- Lord Atm: Ressou stated, on Thursday, that in order to make way for the second reading of the Municipal Corpo- ration Bill, Lord Morpeth's motion on the subject of Irish Titlreswould be postponed from Monday to Friday next ; but last night, Lord MORPETH again postponed it to Friday fortnight CAPITAL PUNISHMENTS BILL. 011 Wednesday this bill went through the Committee.

PRISONERS COUNSEL BILL. On the motion of Mr. EWART. this bill was read a second time on Wednesday. It was strenuously sup- ported by Mr. HORACE TWISS.

COUNTY CORONERS BILL. On Wednesday, the second reading of this bill was agreed to, on the motion of Mr. Cowes.

ENNIS ELECTION. The Committee reported, on Thursday, that Mr. Bridgman, the sitting Member, was duly elected.

New Worts On the motion of Mr. J. °swat" a 110W writ was ordered on Wednesday, for the election of a Member for the Ayr Burghs, in the room of Mr. Alexander Oswald, who has taken the Chiltern Hundreds.