V.rhatto mitt Vrntrttingo in Varlinnuut

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

Rows or Loans. Monday, April 19. Masters in Chancery Abolition Bin; intro- duced—Mutiny Bills, read a third time and passed.

Tuesday, April 20. Royal Assent to the Mutiny Bills and Private Bills—Patent Law Amendment Bill (No. 2), reed a third time and passed—Maynooth Endowment; Questioning of Ministers, and Lord Derby's Answers. Thursday, April 22, St. Alban's Disfranchisement Bill, read a second time. Friday, April 23. No business of interest.

Bonn or COADIONS. Monday, April 10. Charitable Trusts Bill, postponed to next Monday—Crystal Palace; Mr. Heywood's motion postponed till the 29th instant—Grand Juries in London; leave to the Attorney-General, for a Bill to abolish—East India Company ; Mr. Herries's Motion for a Committee—Passengers Act Amendment Bill, considered in Committee—Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill, considered in Committee as amended, and clauses added.

Tuesday, April 20. County Courts Extension Bill, postponed by Mr. Fitzroy tilt Wednesday week—Public Business: Thursdays for Ministers on and after the 6th of May—Maynooth; Mr. Spooner's Motion postponed till Tuesday the 4th of May— Mr. Bennett and the Bishop of Bath and Wells ; Mr. Horsman's Motion debated, and the Ministerial " previous question " carried by 100 to 80—Hungarian Refugee Corre- spondence; Lord Dudley Stuart's Motion for production of, agreed to. Wednesday, April 21. Irish Fisheries ; Mr. Conolly's Bill withdrawn—Parish Con- stables Bill, read a second time—Enfranchisement of Copyholds Bill, read a second time.

Thursday, April 22. Taxes on Knowledge; Mr. Gibson's Motion debated, and adjourned till after Financial Statement.

Friday, April 23. Ports and Harbours; Mr. Stafford to ask leave for a Bill on Monday—Law of Settlement ; no Government measure this Session—Dlilltiss Bill ; second reading debated, and adjourned till Monday.

TIME-TABLE.

The Lords, The Commons.

Hour of Hour of Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment. Meeting. Adjournment. Monday bh .. . Oh 110m Monday 4h .(m) Itt Om Tuesday Mr . . 86 bens Tuesday th .... 9h 15m Wednesday No Sitting. Wednesday Noon .... Me SOm Thursday. bh .... 7h bin Thursday 4h .... 8h 16m

Friday Oh .... 311 3+ m Friday 4h .(m) 1h 15m

Bittinsa this IC eek, 4 ; Tiro, 511 15ns Sittings this Week, 5; Time, 33h 15m

— this Session, 32; — 58h 35m - this Bernina. 39; — 2416 4bm

GOVERNMENT OP INDIA.

The debate in the House of Commons on the motion of Mr. HERRIES, for a Committee on the Acts of 1833 for effecting a new arrangement with the East Indian Company. for the better Government of her Ma- jesty's Indian Possession; was in its matter and framework only supple- mentary to that which recently took place in the House of Peers on Lord Derby's similar motion ; but as there are more Members of the House of Commons than there are Peers who are practically conversant with Indian affairs, some new contributions were made towards the stock of

public information. .

The opening portion of the speech of Mr. Herries showed historically, that since 1784, when the system of government was established from which the .present does not much (Mier, there has been a general tendency 63 the abolition of all the exclusive rights, privileges, and possessions of the )?ad Indla.Company as such ; and the.drift of the later portion of his speech, we, to uphold his own bumble judgment that the present system of Indian go, vernment is the best that could be devised, and cannot be improved by the wisdom, of Parliament. Ti refterenee to the particular juncture, the ap_ preach of which has rendered prudent the collection of information by eorn, mittees of both Houses, he reminded Members, that the existing acts expire in 1854, but that the stock of the proprietors will not be redeemable till 1874; and it is a feature of the arrangement implying the intended pee. manency of the existing general arrangements, that if the Government should at any time before 1874 take from the Company any of its privileges of ad, ministration, the Company may demand the redemption of its stock at the rate of 2001. for every 1001. of it existing- But the chief information given was in answer to the question which he asked, what-has been the effect of the present mode of managing the Indian empire between 1833 and the present time ? He touched on the subjects of the revenue, the debt, the exports and imports, the public works, the em- ployment of natives in administration general and judicial, the progress of education and religion, and the exercise of patronage by. the Directors. The revenue in 1834-5 was 18,107,773/., in 184950 it was 25,160,575/. ; the ex- penses in 1834-5 were 18,602,2501., and: in 1850-1 they are estimated to have been 25,027,9911. In the last four years, therefore, there has been a &Scion- cy--eacept in the year before last, when there was a surplus of about 350,0001. ; but a larger amount than the yearly deficiency has been laid out in great public works. The war in Afghanistan, in Seinde, and the two wars In the Punjanb, cost 36,000,000/. ; but no less than 16,000,0001. of that sum was paid as extraordinary expenses- out of the current revenue of the territory, so that only 20,000,000/. was added to the debt,—ample reason for an expectation that under the better circumstances that may be confi- dently anticipated now, when all internal enemies are subdued and our em. pire consolidated, "the revenue will soon pay off its debt, and fulfil the most sanguine hopes." The interest of the debt in 1834-5 was 1,774,153b; in 1850-1 it was 2,201,1051. The imports in those two periods were corn.. paratively 6,154,1291. and 12,549,307/.,—an increase of more than double: the comparative exports were about 8,00,0001. and 18,000,0001.—a still larger increase. -The public works in hand. are, among others, a grand trunk-road from Calcutta through Delhi and Lahore to Cashmere, upwards of 1500 miles long, of which 965 miles have already been completed, "metalled through.. out," at a cost of 10001. per mile, anda total estimated cost of about 1,500,0004; a- trunk-road across from Calcutta to Bombay, 1000 miles, to cost 500,0001,- a road from Bombay to Agra, 734 miles, at about 3501. per mile ; a grand canal for conveyance and irrigation between the Ganges and the Jumna from Hurdwar to Alleghur, and thence to Humarpore, 765 miles, at a cast of 1,500,0001. ; besides the guarantee of a certain dividend on railways, at Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay. The natives employed in local administration at salaries of 241. sterling pee annum may be thus classified-1 at 1560/. ; 8 at 8401. to 9601. ; 12 at 7 to 840/. ; 68 at 6001. to 7201. ; 69 at 4801. to 600/. ; 58 at 360/. to 4801. ; 277 at 2401. to 3601. ; 1173 at 1201. to 240/. ; 1147 at and under 1201. ; total, 2813 natives.

Justice is administered in India mainly by natives, not only between na- tives and natives' but in civil. causes between natives and Europeans. From these civil courts the appeals only amounted to 145 per cent, and the reversals of sentence did- not exceed 4 per cent. On education Mr. Herries quoted a statement which had been prepared for him as follows- " In 1823 the only native educational establishments founded by the British Go- vernment were the Mahomedan College, Calcutta, and Sanscrit College, Benarex In 1835 there were fourteen. In 1852 there were now in Bengal and the North-western Provinces above forty. In 1835 the- great change was adopted' of substituting the English for the Oriental system of education ; and in the report of the Council of Education for 1849 Mr. Bethune said—' There is no institution in England where the published answers of the students are subjected to so strict and severe a test. I have no hesitation in saying, that every succeeding examination that I witness in- creases my admiration of the acuteness and talent, literary and scientific, which are evinced by the young men of this country.' In the Elphinstone Institution of Bom- bay the course of study was stated • to be equal in.extent to a course for a degree in an English university.' On the subject of the ecclesiastical establishment in India, he gave these facts—"In the year 1812 there were only fourteen chaplains at Bengal, twelve at Madras, and five at Bombay. In 1813 a bishop of Calcutta and three archdeacons for the Presidency were appointed; in 1832 there were in Bengal thirty-seven ohaplains, in Madras twenty-three, and in Bombay fit teen; under the act of 1833 the archdeacons ceased,. and two additional bishops were appointed-; and now there are three bishops and sixty-eight chaplains in Bengal, thirty-four in Madras, and twenty-eight in Bombay— making three bishops and 130 chaplains altogether, in addition to six of the Scotch Church."' The patronage of the Directors had been exercised thus—In 1860, 56 wri- ters, 234 cadets, and 56 surgeons. Out of 146 cadets now at Addiseombe, 17 are sons of Indian servants; and out of 2622 appointments that had been made between 1840 and 1851, 1100 had been given to sons of Indian servants, exhibiting therefore something the reverse of that partiality with which the Company had been charged.

Mr. ANSTEY moved, as an amendment, that an address be presented to the Queen praying the appointment of Commissioners to inquire on the spot into the feelings and- wishes of the Queen's subjects, natives and Eu- ropean, residing in her Indian dominions. Mr. Anstey's speecirwent over the ground of his former speeches on In- dian affairs picturing our rule in India as one which has reduced the peo- ple of India, both in fact and in their own deep feeling, to a condition of hopeless misery, that is better or worse only in proportion as British rule is less or more direct. He touched on the salt monopoly, as an illustration of the oppressive financial principles of the Company's government, and on the continued deficiency of revenue as proof of their financial "success.' With reference to taxation and government, he contended-that the revenue is well collected where it is levied through the municipal assemblies of the villages themselves, but badly raised wherever there is no representative govern- ment ; that the natives are fit for the highest offices, but are excluded from any but the most subordinate ones, and wherever they obtain appointments above the average grade, their salaries are parsimoniously low in comparison, with the equal grade of European office. In fact, India had been goverm by men who had gone there not for the advantage of the country but for their own benefit ' • and India would never be peaceful or contented till she was governed according to Indian and not European views, and for Indian and not European interests: The- amendment was opposed by nearly all the speakers who followed Mr. Anstey. Those who from their special knowledge of the question, or their political position, were most entitled to notice, are Mr. Heim' s, Mr. Hvain, Sir hamsa, a,ams Warn Houo, Lord Jon/ RUSSELL, and Mr. R. D. mAziolas.

Mr. Mammon gave testimony, founded on his personal observation, the condition of the natives in the British dominions is very strongly and favourably contrasted with that of those who live undeerackrents and extor- tion in the tributary states—such as Oude, and the Nizam's territory. The sea-duties have been reduced LI per cent, and do not amount to more than ce per head ; and the land-tax, if occasionally unequal, is one to 'eh the natives have been accustomed from time immemorial both under go Medea) and Mahomedan dynasties. yr, Hann expressed gratifieation at having given way to Mr. Harclinge, and his hope that India may find in one of his experience a steady advocate for the improvement of her condition. He said he must oppose Mr. Anstey's amendment, as " utterly impracticable" ; and he observed on- the speech which supported it, that with much in it that was true, there was also much ps it that was exaggerated. Instead of comparing India with England, it should be compared with our Colonies: in that comparison India stood better off and more prosperous than any-of our settlements. The evils which have oppressed India have not been attributable to the Court of Directors,. but to the Ministry at home. Thus, the Court of Directors knew nothing of the Afghan war till the whole mischief was done. The Court of Directors should be the council of. the Minister of the day, and their powers should be en- ',aged instead of being restricted. But the constitution of the Court should be improved; and- it should consist of men- devoted solely to the business of die Court, and not of persons who merely went there to vote on certain days. Sir JAMES WBIR Recta gave detailed information on several points, chiefly in answer to Mr. Anstey's "amazing" statements. On the land-tax he said, that by the last survey, which had been a most accurate and minute the net rental of the soil was ascertained ; and of that rental, 20 per eat was allotted to the cultivator or the tenant, 18 per cent to the talook- dar or middleman, and 62. to the Government. In many cases, there were no talookdars or intermediate men ; and in these cases 30 per cent was al- lotted to the cultivating tenant, and 70 per cent to the Government. He sketched the relative duties of the General Board of Directors, and of the Secret Committee. All matters of war and of treaty with native powers are vested, and properly vested, in her Majesty's Government; who, after gaming a despatch on these topics, send it, not to the Court of Directors, but to the Secret Committee, consisting of the Chairman, the Deputy-Chair- men, and the senior member of the Court ; and for that despatch her Ma- ' 'a Government was exclusively. responsible. This, however, was a very 1 and minute part of the administrative government of India ; the bum- ems of the financial, judicial, and other departments, being vested by law in the East India Company, and transacted practically by the Directors. All letters and despatches come to the Court of Directors; and' despatches, after being framed by the Executive, are submitted to. the Committee of the department to which they belong, and, if diaapproved of, a discussion takes place upon them; they are then placed upon the table for a week, and af- terwards undergo discussion by the whole Court. After this the despatch goes to the Board of Control; who either approve or disapprove of it ; but in this last case, the law provides that, should the Court of Directors disapprove of the alteration made, they may remonstrate, and call on her Majesty's Go- vernment to assign reasons for the alterations.

The imputation by Mr. Hume, that the Directors are not diligent in at- tindance at the board, was met by this assertion—By law there must be an attendance of Directors once a week ; and for the last three or five years, he forgot which, there had been an attendance of twenty members at every Court; and he could: declare that there is not a day in the year when there are not from eight to ten present at the India House. Lord Joan RUSSELL reminded the House, that the Committee would not have to determine anything in reference- to the future government of India ;. but only to collect information. for better enabling Government and Parlia- ment to determine for itself. He communicated that the late Government had determined' on asking for Committees in both Houses. Oh the- question of declaring-war, mooted, by Mi. Hume, he said he thought it should not be viewed scanIndian question alone, but with reference to European inte- rests: it would therefore better be left with the Crown. The general ad- ministration had better be left with the Court of Director; and the patron- age also; for to give the latter to the Crown would be dangerous to our con- stitution. On the whole, he thought it would be hardly Doesible to improve the general outline of the Indian government: though. 'there might be ob- jections in theory- yet experience showed that it had worked beneficially for the people of India; as would be strongly felt it comparison. were made be- tween the British: rule in India and the native rule in Turkey or in.Persia. Mr.. Merrores rose chiefly to state that he could not concur in suggestions made by the Members for the Universities of' Oxford and Cambridge, that in religion Government should do-more, as a government, "than hold the scale even betwixt all parties, and give full scope to the preaching of Christianity by those who from the highest and. purest motives are carrying-forward the work in India." Having risen to make this point, he added a suggestion on another point; founded on personal observation as a member of the Court of Directors. He believed that the present mode of election, and' the canvass- ing that takes place, deter many of the highest class of men who have- re- turned from India. from taking (age ; and he thought it would be an im-

provement if means were devised by which men of that class could be ad- mitted into the Court of Directors from time to time without the necessity of entering into a painful' personal canvass.

The otherspeakers were Mr. BKILLLR, Sir T: COLMBROOKEi. Sir ROBERT hems, Mr. Goveennw and Sir HENRY Wirxeutinev.

The amendinent was negatived,, and.the original motion- was agreed to.

MAYNOOTEt ENDOWIVENT.

An attempt was made by the Marquis of CLANRICARDE,, in the Rouse of Peers on Tuesday, to get some clearer light on the policy of the Go- vernment with respect to the Maynooth. endowment. On a recent ocession, Lord Derby had said in answer to an inquiry, " that he had no intention of altering the policy of the Government as to May- nooth, at the: present moment." But on a more recent occasion, another member of the Government had made a declaration which seemed to show that Lord Derby's concluding words, " at the present moment," were the Bea point of his denial. In the course of a speech to the electors of Sufi folk, delivered by the Solicitor-General, Sir Fitzroy Kelly, at Woodbridge last week, he said, that he " should cordially support the motion for an in- quirI into the whole circumstances attending the Maynooth grant, which is about to be brought before the House of Commons" ; and then he went on to give this pledge of his own conduct-

And if, gentlemen, as the result of the inquiries of that Committee, and as the Port of that Committee, it shall be found that, consistently with the good faith of ornament, and consistently with what becomes all public men to observe, strict floor and integrity with their felloW-countrymen, it is possible to put an end to that grant, I for one shall rejoice in concurring with the Government, of which am unworthy member, in an act entirely to put an end to it." Now it is true that there is no notice of any motion- on- the subject in !her House by any member of the Government; and that the only motion ,about to be brought before the House of Commons " on the subject is that Mr. Spooner, which is for a Committee not to inquire into any contracts engagements made with the - College of. Maynooth, nor into any cases of .tegrity and good faith between it and the Government, but into the system 1.education carried on at Maynooth—a totally different object : but cer- WI the subject is one on which the country ought not to be kept in the 34; and the opinion avowed by the Solicitor-General; if it be that of her

tune Government, ought not to have been promulgated for the first rime by one of its inferior officers to the electors of Suffolk on the

hustings at Woodbridge. Recalling to mind, as important circumstances, that on- the one hand, Sir Fitzroy Kelly was the Solicitor-General of the very Government which proposed the Maynooth endowment act, and on the other hand, several . members of the present Government voted against the second reading of that act,—Mr. Banker, Major Bereaford, Mr. G. A. Hamilton, Mr. Henley, Mr. Christopher, and Mr. Disraeli, (though the last professed to vote against it not on the merits but from want of confidence in the men,)—the Marquis asked Lord Derby for a distinct statement of his in- tentions with respect to Maynooth.

The Earl of DERBY made a reply which did not contain any one definite announcement of policy or intention. He started with a verbal correction. When questioned before, "his an- swer had not been that it was not the intention of Government to propose any alteration with regard to the grant to the College of Maynooth at pre- sent, but that her Majesty's Government had no present intention of altering the law with respect to that institution" ; and at the end of that answer he had added this qualification—"that notwithstanding such was the case, he must observe, the attitude which the Roman Catholic Church had assumed, and the spirit of aggression which it had adopted, added greatly to the diffi- culties of those who desired to defend the continuance of the grant to May- nooth, which was made permanent by the act of 1845"

From this correction Lord Derby went on to say, that Lord Clanricarde had greatly increased the difficulty of maintaining the grant by hie speech. The only two grounds on which the vindication of the grant could rest, were the ground of general policy, and the ground of good faith given or implied by the Government of this country : but Lord Clanricarde bad thrown completely overboard the second ground. "The ground of general policy was from the first, and it still continued to be, founded on a desire to give to the Irish population within the Queen's dominions, a sound and liberal theological education, and on the hope that that liberality on the part of Parliament, continued from year to year, and confirmed by formal enactment in the year I845, would produce that which it was natural to expect, an enlightened and well-educated priesthood, well affected to the Crown and respecting the authority of the Government, disposed to inculcate charity and forbear- ance and peace among all classes of society, together with devoted loyalty to the Sovereign and obedience to the law of the land. That was the policy which originally dictated and subsequently confirmed the grant. The noble Marquis said, that he could easily understand the conduct of those who in the year 1845 opposed the grant on principle, and who afterwards, when the law was passed—there the noble Martinis stopped, and would not say ` and when the fruit which it produced was clearly seen '—the noble Martini; he re- peated, said that he could easily understand the conduct of those who, first opposing, afterwards supported the- law, or at any rate did not press for its repeal, and that he did not see any inconsistency in their so doing. Lord Derby was sorry to say that the converse of that proposition was equally true, and that there were very many who supported the original grant in the hope and expectation that it would produce other fruits than those which had been derived from it, and who *era now not guilty of any inconsistency if they had changed their opinions as to the policy of that grant from sad• ex- perience of the fruits which it had borne." In reference to the speech of the Solicitor-General, Lord Derby said be had no time to read newspaper reportw of speeches, and he protested on behalf of himself and the Government generally against being made responsible for any newspaper report of any speech : but from what he now heard, the Soli- citor-General seemed to have said that he was of opinion that the polioy whioh• dictated the grant to Maynooth had not produced all the good effects which had been expected from it : "on that particular point Lord Derby thought the Solicitor-General participated in the feelings of a very large portion of her Majesty's loyal subjects." As to &Committee of inquiry by her Majesty's Government, no such notice had been given. Such a notice had been given in the other House by an independent Member, Mr. Spooner; and if that Committee were appointed, and if the result of its inquiries should prove that the system of education adopted at Maynooth had failed to produce the fruits hoped from it, and if the point, which the noble Marquis had abandoned at once, could be established—namely, that there was no-ob- ligation of good faith by which we were bound to pursue the policy which had produced such unfortunate results—in such a case, the Solicitor-General might have stated that he should be inclined to concur in any of her Majesty's Government, not to putting an end- to the College of May- nooth, but to the endowment of it. But it was not by declarations made by independent individuals, or by persons connected with the Administration on the hustings, that the policy of the Government was to be determined. If any change of policy were contemplated by the Government with reference to the subject in question, it was in that and the other House of Parliament the change must be announced. The Government had no present intention of altering the existing law ; but he would add, that if circumstantiate should arise to induce the Government to take another course, ample notice would be given in both Houses of Parliament, and then the noble Marquis would have an opportunity of opposing the contemplated change, or of tauntingin- dividuale with supposed inconsistency between their present principles and past conduct. Earl- Gm was dissatisfied, and asked, was it consistent with fairness and open dealing, on the part of Government,, to stimulate agitation by refusing to express an opinion on the subject one way or the other ?

The noble Earl ought to declare whether he• adhered to the opinion ex- pressed by him in 1845; and, if he did adhere to it, he should also inform, the House whether he held it merely as his own private and abstract opin- ion, like that in favour of the imposition of a duty on foreign corn, or whether it was to govern the policy of the Government. For himself, Lord Grey entertained a strong opinion that it would be little short of a declare- tion of war against the great body of the people of Ireland to take away the

grant from Maynooth, and at the same time to leave the revenues of the Established Church and the endowments of the various classes of Protestant Dissenters untouched.

The questioning being continued pertinaciously, the Earl of DERBY re- fused to say anything further, than that he is " greatly disappointed in the result of the measure of 1845" ; and' that if a motion were made to

repeal that act, then he would state the course Government would be pre- pared to pursue on the question. The Earl of HARROWBY in turn questioned Lop); Grey, whether he adhered to the opinions he held of the result of the measume. . Lord Garr

answered, that he had not originally supported the endowment on the ground generally entertained, but more on the ground of conciliation than on the expectation of any important effects to flow directly from it. The Marquis of Leroseowere then volunteered a statement of the rea- sons why he had supported the grant.

Those reasons were the statesman's reason, avowed- by Sir Robert Peel, that every member of the community, not ignoring the Roman Catholic religion, has a deep lasting interest that the education of the priesthood should be of the beet sort, and publicly known ; and that it was a great good and an im- mense advantage, by a permanent endowment to put an end for ever to the opposition, strife, disputes, irritation, and animosity which had been fomented yearly for the thirty years that the grant had been annual. He now ad- jured Lord Derby and the Government, not hastily to adopt any coune.

which would reopen the question, and renew and perpetuate all the evils at- tending the annual votes. He had supported the measure before, and he would support it again ; believing still that the country at large would be gainers by the endowment of the institution.

The discussion of the points mooted by the Marquis of Clanriearde here finished. A pendent to the debate was supplied by the Bishop of CASHEL, in the shape of a striking though not immediately connected state- ment which he introduced controversially—

It was found that Irishmen who had gone to America, where they were free from the persecution of their priests and neighbours, soon conformed to the Protestant Church in America. This statement was confirmed by the annals of the Propaganda. The population of the United States was about 23,000,000. It was stated in the Osorterly Review that there were 3,000,000 of Irishmen in the United States, who were born in Ireland, and that there were 4,500,000 descended from Irishmen. The annals of the Propaganda only claimed 1,663,000 Roman Catholics in the United States, out of the 7,500,000 Irishmen there. The Bishop of Cashel claimed this result as an effect of the labours of the Protestant clergy upon the converts while they were yet in Ireland.

THE REVEREND MR. BENNETT AT Fuo'ea.

Mr. Hoesmais gave to the motion of which he has had a general notice on the books of the House of Commons, the form of a recital of the 39th and 48th ecclesiastical canons of the Church of England ; followed by a resolution to pray the Queen to direct inquiry as to whether those eccle- siastical canons have not been violated by the institution of Mr. Bennett at Frome. He supported his motion by a history of Mr. Bennett's con- duct at Knightsbridge, and of the circumstances of his quasi-expulsion by the Bishop of London from the Metropolitan diocese ; by a statement, from peculiar sources of information, of Mr. Bennett's conduct and asso- ciates on the Confluent last year ; and then by a criticism of these cir- cumstances with a view to show that the Bishop of Bath and Wells had acted in repudiation of the ecclesiastical laws in appointing Mr. Bennett to Frome.

The 48th canon declares that a bishop shall not admit to service any mi- nister from another see without a certificate from the late bishop of the migrating clergyman's "honesty, ability, and conformity to the ecclesiasti- cal laws of the kingdom." Now, the Bishop of London compelled Mr. Ben- nett to resign, because, as the Bishop said to him in published letters, he " deliberately and avowedly disobeyed the administrations of his bishop," setting up his judgment of the Church's intention in opposition to the ludgment of his bishop, and refusing to give up "novelties" which the Bishop of London had "forbidden as contrary to the Church's order and intention, and had called on him to lay aside.' Was such a breach of disci- pline a "conformity with the ecclesiastical laws of the Church " ? The 39th canon decrees that no bishop shall institute any who "shall not appear on due examination worthy of his minietey." Last year, Mr. Bennett and Sir J. Harington, his late Churchwarden, were at Kissingen in Germany ; and in the same hotel with them was a professor of one of the seminaries near London, a man of veracity. Mr. Bennett was accounted by the Ger- man waiters a Jesuit, or a Capuchin. The Professor being ill, he was con- fined to bed ; and while he was so confined he was compelled to hear the loud talk of Sir John Harington and Mr. Bennett, and to conclude from that talk that Mr. Bennett was a Romanist. It was notorious at Kissingen that Mr. Bennett attended daily the early morning mass at the Roman Catholic church. Mr. Roseman asked, was such a. man fit to be in- stituted' by the Bishop vicar of the Protestant living of Frome ? The ease thus barely explained by us, Mr. Horsman stated with great amplitude of detail and fulness of colour : its effect was increased by quo- tations from the known writings of Mr. Bennett ; by reference to the perversion of two of his curates at Knightsbridge, and of nearly all the Sis- ters of Mercy ; and by the statement that his first act in Frome was to dis- miss the popular curate, and appoint Mr. De Gex, the foremost of the three curates at Knightsbridge and Pimlico who resigned when the Bishop of Lon- don exacted Mr. Bennett's resignation ; and it was wound up by an appeal to the Protestant sympathies of the House. In that House were many pre- sent who knew the domestic sorrows, the social distrust, the parental anguish, even the broken hearts, which had come out of Mr. Bennett's ministry at Knightsbridge. Such things had been in London, and might they not be at Frome ? No redress could, unhappily, be looked for in the Church—our clergy were too much mistrusted, our prelates too deeply tainted. There was hope only in the laity, who are the Church—her strength, her sound- ness, and her hope. Let Parliament, representing that laity, lay their peti- tions at the foot of the Sovereign, and pray her to add one more to the many claims she has established on the love and admiration of her faithful sub- jects, by defending their religion not against assaults from without, but against treachery within—not against open enemies, but against unworthy sons ; and when unfaithfulness is found in high places, by compelling even the dignitaries of the Church to show that obedience to her laws which the Bishop of Bath and Wells had repudiated ; and so becoming truly a defender of that faith on which both the liberties of her people and her own crown have been established.

The case put by Mr. Horsman seemed to have much effect on the House. Mr. DISRAELI opposed the motion, but in a tone of great cour- tesy to Mr. Horsman, and with a reiteration of the same reasons and ar- guments, that bespoke anxiety as to their effect.

He admitted that an enormous grievance had been described, but urged the unsuitableness of the House for such discussions. He argued, that either there was a remedy in the regular ecclesiastical tribunal, or there was none : if there was one, as he believed there was, by appeal to the Bishop's eccle- siastical superior, the Archbishop, that mode should be resorted to or at all events tried first; but if there was no remedy of that kind, then it would be proper to come in a becoming manner to Parliament for a legislative remedy. The suggested mode of a Commission would be inadequate and nugatory., and injurious to the authority of the Crown ; for a Commission could not en- force answers to its inquiries; and it would be injurious and inconvenient to the House itself, by opening up a field of inquiry which it would be im- possible to define or circumscribe hereafter. Again, as at first, compliment- ing Mr. Horsman on his ability and conscientiousness, again as once before declining to give any personal opinion on any of the points, and again ad- mitting that an 'enormous grievance had been described, he moved "the previous question."

But indisposition to accede to this course was manifested among some Conservative supporters of the Government ; and Mr. NEWDEGATE "beg- ged to say that the question having been raised, must be dealt with." Sir . :Tom treated the matter very gravely ; saying he had listened a. t with "painful attention."

the House, that the Bishop of Bath and Wells was not only

• i• • in. years, but that his health was greatly impaired. He ad- uilythe conduct of Mr. Bennett at Kissinger ought to be

i t of nquiry ; for if well supported by evidence, it implied Ily unfit to hold preferment in the Church of England : but he courteously urged Mr. Foreman to be satisfied with the assurance thattha conduct of Mr. Bennett at Kissingen would not pass without inquiry.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it was impossible to deny that this was s subject on which the House had a right to explanation; the House of Commons was a party to the Act of Uniformity, and ha therefore a right to ask whether beneficed clergymen were faithful members of the Este. blished Church, or in fact of some other religious denomination. But he felt extreme difficulty in proceeding forward to exercise the right The House was uninformed of much that should enter into an opinion, pelt. cnlarly as to the state of the law, whether there is any regular appeal to a higher ecclesiastical tribunal or not Complimenting Mr. Herman for the ability he had shown, and acknowledging the good disposition shown by Sir John Pakington, Lord John suggested, that the Government should undertake inquiries in a friendly way, and state at a future day what mode of proceeding or inquiry they thought advisable. Some other speakers having dealt with the subject in a simi. larly serious manner, Mr. WALPOLE adopted the suggestion of Lord John Russell, and reminded the House that the previous gees, tion " did not shelve the question, but would in fact be the best means of only postponing it in the manner that would allow the Government to carry out the friendly inquiry suggested. But Mr. AGLi- ONBY and some other Members urged Mr. Horsman not to yield ; sad Mr. HORSMAN promptly stated that he had no doubt about his course, which would be to accept nothing but a "judicial investigation." A slight breeze arose on a point of alleged "misquotation" between Mr. HOESMAN and Mr. GrAnsvoxe, the only Member who directly mess. vened his statements and opposed the whole drift of his motion. This having subsided, a division was taken on the amendment of Mr. Ins. HAIM, "the previous question"—that the original motion be not put to the House. This amendment was carried by 100 to 80.

THE "TAXES ON KNOWLEDOP.."

Mr. MILNER GIBSON, in bringing forward this year his resolution against the Taxes on Knowledge, was very particular to frame his motion in such a form that each one of the three propositions it contained in re- ference to the three separate imposts, might stand or fall by itself; so that the success of the whole should not be endangered by the failure of any one. His propositions were-

1. That such financial arrangements ought to be made as will enable Par. liament to dispense with the duty on paper. 2. That the newspaper-stamp ought to be abolished. 3. That the tax on advertisements ought to be re. pealed. He opened by saying that he appeared as the advocate of no particular "distressed interest," but moved onwards in the interest of the whole public. He especially referred the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the arrangement of the resolution ; which would leave him at liberty to select any one or two of the three taxes for remission, if he should think that the remission of all would be too great a financial gift to be afforded by the Exchequer. Mr. Gibson then went into the particular case in favour of each proposition.

In reference to the paper-duty, he quoted a letter lately written to Mr. Disraeli by the proprietor of a popular illustrated newspaper,. explaining a new instance in which the Excise regulations have restricted invention and prevented improvements. When paper is first made it is moist; and the maker, in order to escape paying a heavy percentage of duty on the water or moisture it contains, expensively and rapidly dries it; but before paper can be printed upon it must again be made moist; and the beautiful original surface can never be perfectly restored. If the original moist surface might be printed upon, the present cost of printing might be greatly. reduced. Again, the duty presses with enormous weight upon the cheaper publication; published by such men as Mr. John Cassell. They had cheapness ; they wanted goodness. They had their penny publications ; what stood in the way of making them as good as they could be made?—The paper-duty : and he would explain how that operated. Mr. Cassell expended something little short of 1001. per week, paid to the Government in hard cash, for circulating his penny publications. The duty on the paper used in those publications took away that 1001. per week. If it were repealed, the publications would still be issued ; the price would not be reduced—it was low enough to secure a large circulation : but he would not put that 100/. into his own pocket; competition would force him to lay it out in the improvement of those publications, and he would expend it on a higher order of authorship and better literary talent than he was able to employ at present.

Upon the advertisement-duty branch of the subject Mr. Gibson could scarcely say anything new. His general case was thus embodied. Look at the United States of America ; they had 10,000,000 of advertisements in their newspapers in a year. In England there were only 2,000,000; eight mil- lions were knocked off by the advertisement-duty. And who were the ad. vertisers who had to pay each time Is. 6d. ? Chiefly the poor and industri- ous, who were seeking in vain a market for their labour.

On the stamp-duty also Mr. Gibson could add little to what had already been said. He thought it was going on rapidly to give a monopoly of the daily press to one or two Metropolitan newspapers. The retrogradent cir- culation of nearly all the London daily journals for the last few years really seemed to make it certain that all the other journals would ultimately be dis- placed by the Berm Mr. EWART seconded the motion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed it at considerable length; but the substance of his reasons for opposing it may be put in small com- pass. He could not allow himself to look at the question in any but a purely financial light ; as he was going to make his flhancial statement on Friday next he excused himself till then. When he had put his pro- positions before the House, Mr. Gibson might place his own propositions in competition with them, for the House to choose between them. But in giving this general assurance, Mr. Disraeli adopted a tone which created an impression that the Government is " cotisidenng " one or other of the particular taxes he explicitly separated the three taxes, in order to dwell on the considerable amount of the first, and to admit ihat the other two suggest " grave consideration." In the absence of Mr. Gibson, Mr. WAXLEY and Mr. COBDEN moved and seconded a proposal to adjourn the debate for a fortnight ; which they founded on the very favourable augury they drew from the tone of Mr. Disraeli's speech ; and when Mr. Graces reentered the House he promptly fell in with that course. Mr. Disasszu rose, however, and ex- plicitly stated that he had not meant what was presumed— "So long as I have the conduct of the House, I should be very much an- noyed if any deception had taken place. I should not wish the right hon- ourable gentleman, or any of his friends, to think that the question is under the consideration of the Government at all with reference to his motion, or more specifically than it is the duty of the Government to consider the tar- ation of the country in all its branches : in that way the consideration of those taxes is not omitted. No statement has been made by me to lead him suppose that it is under more particular consideration. The proposition for adjournment did not come from this side. I proposed no terms. I merely stated that on tomorrow week I shall make the financial statement." Mr. HUME hoped the Government would well consider the question ; and be informed Mr. Disraeli of a fact which perhaps he was not aware of— A deputation, consisting of about fifty or sixty individuals connected with the paper trade, having waited on Lord John Russell when he was at the head of the Government, Lord John distinctly stated to them, that he rested his objections to their proposition entirely on financial grounds, and as such only he would view it. For himself, Mr. Hume suggested that the news- -stamp be removed; and let newspapers be put in the same category asletters and parcels passing through the Post-office—for they did not want to deprive the Government of a penny of postage. It appeared that while 91,03,000 copies of newspapers were altogether circulated in this country in the year, the number circulated in the 'United States amounted to 422,70000- Mr. MO WATT regretted that Mr. Gibson had assented to the adjourn- ment : a division now would strengthen his position when the financial statement is made. The debate was adjourned to Wednesday the 12th of May.

ABOLITION OF THE MASTERS' OFFICES.

The Loren CHANCELLOR brought in, and briefly explained, his bill for the Abolition of the Office of Master in Chancery ; recommending it by the statement that he had been assisted in its preparation by the Master of the Rolls and the three Vice-Chancellors, who will have to work its provisions.

At present there are nine Masters in Chancery, and one mastership vacant. It is proposed to abolish the office ; to relieve the four senior Masters after the first day of next Michaelmas Term, giving them retirement on their full salaries • and to maintain the other five, only for winding up all matters now before them, and such matters as the Lord Chancellor may confide to them up to the period of the new bill's operation. The subsisting Masters would have new powers given them to facilitate their despatch of business,— for example, such powers to compel suitors to bring their eases into court and carry them forward as those exercised by himself as Lord Chancellor of Ire- land, which enabled him to clear off all the old cases which he found still on band.

The new scheme is that "the four Judges in Equity, namely, the Master of the Rolls and the three Vice-Chancellors,", shall carry on in chambers all the business now done by the Masters; being aided by a chief clerk to each appointed by each himself, and by an assistant clerk appointed by each chief clerk. Thus there will be no references to the Masters, no statements of facts, and no reports of the Master; the Judge will go into chambers at what hour he thinks convenient, or even for the whole day, "and consult with the clerks what is to be done" ; "and if a report is necessary, he will either draw it up himself, or send for the registrar to draw it up for him." Lord St. Leonards was "most anxious that the new clerks should not find their way into Southampton Buildings" [where the Masters now sit] ; "for if they were once placed there, they would act as if they were Masters and not clerks, and in that case the scheme would not answer." So he would sell the present building, and the produce of the sale would be enough to build three commodious courts for the three Vice-Chancellors, with rooms annexed for the accommodation of their clerks. Meanwhile, commodious chambers should bdprovided in Lincoln's Inn. A learned friend [Lord Brougham] had introduced a bill to extend the jurisdiction of the County Courts; Turd St. Leonards anticipated that his friend would now agree that that bill should wait till it could be seen how far it would fit in with and dovetail into and be an assistance to and not a hinderance in the way of the present measure. A bill was also in preparation for cheapening and simplifying the proce- dure in Chancery, by carrying out the recommendations of the Chancery Commission on that branch of the subject of Law Reform ; and that bill he hoped would be ready in about three weeks.

Lord CBANWORTH and Lord CAMPBELL welcomed the bill, reserving liberty to criticize it when they have deliberately examined it. The bill was read a first time.

Sr. Ar..naws DISFRANCHISEMENT.

The second reading of the bill passed by the House of Commons for the disfranchisement of St. Albans, was moved in the Lords by the Earl of DER.BY, in a speech which went with apparent gusto through the de- tails of bribery and corruption revealed by the Commission on whose recommendation the bill is founded.

Lord Derby feared that bribery and corruption prevailed in many of the boroughs in this great country ; though he could not go so far as Mr. Cop- pock, whose experience in venality is unparalleled. And, by the by, he would add this, that whenever the next general election took place, he should consider it to be strong prima facie evidence of bribery against any electors if Mr. Coppock should make his appearance among them. He jocosely re- ferred to Mr. Jacob Bell's experiences : that gentleman never contributed so much to the depletion of any patient by his drugs as he himself suffered from the drastic action of the St. Albans electors on his own purse ; "Mr. Bell was the most forgiving man he had over seen"—" the plundered but for- giving Mr. Bell!" In accordance with precedent, Lord REDFSDALE moved that the prayer of a petition from certain electors to be heard against the bill by counsel should be granted. Several Peers—the Earl of VEnukam, Lord MoxT- luau, Earl GREY, the Duke of ARGYLL, and the Duke of NEWCASTLE— were unwilling to sanction such a pretence and mere plea for delay : the electors had been fully heard already, by the Commission ; and it would be derogatory to the character of such Commissions, and to the dignity of Parliament, to accede to such a sham and delusion. The opposers of the motion divided, but were beaten by 41 to 15 ; so the motion for hearing counsel was affirmed.