dation in this district. This was a case of great importance, and the House ought to have before it every possible means of forming a correct judgment. Lord R. Grosvenor was also of opinion, that the evidence ought to be laid before the House. The House divided. Ayes 136; Noes 166:-Majority 30. WEAVER CHURCHES.] The Order of the Day having been read for resuming the adjourned debate on the question that the House do agree with the Committee, that the costs of opposing the bill be paid out of the new funds, on bringing up the report of the Weaver Churches' Bill, Mr. G. Wilbraham said, he felt bound to oppose this bill in every way that the rules of the House permitted. It was a bill that had for its object a most unjustifiable diversion of the funds of the county of Chester. The surplus revenue derived from the tolls of the Weaver navigation had for many years relieved the county of Chester from the payment of rates, and he considered it most unjust, that this revenue should now, without any reason whatever, be diverted to a totally different object. Sir R. Inglis was surprised at the opposition given to the bill, though he was opposed to the clause. The House divided. Ayes 58; Noes 70:-Majority 12. an an Mr. Wilbraham then moved as amendment, that the minutes of the evidence taken before the committee be laid before the House. There never was occasion in which such a measure as this now before the House was less called for. The great body of the population for whose accommodation the churches in question were intended, were Dissenters, extremely attached to their peculiar mode of worship and to their own ministers. As far as there was any want of accommodation for religious worship and instruction according to the Church of England, it could be adequately supplied by voluntary contribution. List of the AYES. Acland, Sir T. D. Bell M. Bentinck, Lord G. Bethell, R. Blackburne, I. Blair, J. Botfield, B. Bradshaw, James Bramston, T. W. Broadwood, H. Brooke, Sir A. B. Bruce, Lord E. Bruce, C. L. C. Burrell, Sir C. Calcraft, J. H. Burroughes, H. N. Canning, rt. hn. Sir S. Cantilupe, Viscount Cartwright, W. R. Cholmondeley, hn. H. Sir C. Lemon said a great deal Christopher, R. a. spiritual destitution and ignorance pre-Clerk, Sir G. Chute, W. L. W. vailed in the district, and there were two fanatical women who were followed by large numbers of the ignorant and uneducated classes. The question was whether they would endow these women, or was the Established Church to be dowed? of en Sir P. Egerton believed the amendment had merely been moved for the sake of delay, and therefore he should oppose it. Mr. Hobhouse said, that the House ought to have the evidence before them. He had carefully attended to that evidence, and the result was, that he did not consider there was any want of spiritual accommo Cochrane, Sir T. J. Eastnor, Viscount Goring, H. D. Goulburn, rt. hon. H. Grimston, Viscount Hillsborough, Earl of Hodgson, R. Ingestre, Viscount Jackson, Mr. Sergeant Jenkins, Sir R. Knatchbull, right hon. Lefroy, right hon. T. Lemon, Sir C. Lincoln, Earl of Lockhart, A. M. Lowther, hon. Colonel Litton, E. Long, W. Barron, H. W. Ellis, W. Barry, G. S Evans, G. Basset, J. Evans, W. Bewes, T. Ewart, W. Blake, W. J. Fielden, J. Bodkin, J. J. Dundas, C. W. D. Ferguson, Sir R. Ferguson, R. Finch, F. Gillon, W. D. Hill, Lord A. M. C. Howard, P. H, Hutt, W. Hutton, R. James, W. Jervis, J. Jervis, S. Langdale, hon. C. Report received, bill to be engrossed. SUGAR DUTIES.] On the motion for the third reading of the Sugar Duties Bill, Mr. Hume said, that in the last stage of the bill it would be recollected the House refused to reduce the duty on foreign sugar, and on the preceding evening the House refused to permit the passage of free labourers from Bengal and other parts of the East Indies to the Mauritius; since that time the price of sugar had risen very considerably, and it was likely to rise higher still, in consequence of the deficient supply. What he wished, therefore, to know was, whether it was the intention of the noble Lord to take any steps to insure a supply of free labour in those colonies, on which the supply of sugar depended? Lord John Russell said, that the proposition made to the House was the admission of free labour from the East Indies to the Mauritius. The House decided against that proposition, but, as he understood, on information, and not on the ground that for the middle classes had been estabit ought to be denied at once and for ever. lished at Lichfield and other places. He As he understood that to be the wish of would urge upon the House at least the the House, he certainly should not think delay of a year in deference to what he himself justified in allowing the importa- would say was the almost unanimous detion of free labour into the Mauritius, un sire of the clergy of England. The hon. tii that further information was received. Member concluded by moving, When that was received it would be for “ That an humble address be presented to Parliament to say whether it would sanc- her Majesty, representing that this llouse, betion such a plan. He did not think Go fore proceeding to pass any bill for the reguvernment would be justified in advising lation of cathedral establishments, desires 10 the Crown to adopt it, until the question receive further information as to the duties and had been brought before the House. He general purposes, which are contemplated by was anxious by every legitimate means to which the capitular clergy, in conformity ihere ibe statutes of the respective foundations, and increase free labour in our colonies, being with, may beneficially discharge; and humbly convinced it was only by reason of a con- praying, that her Majesty will be graciously siderable increase of free labour that we pleased to authorise and direct the visitors of could at all compete or make any success the cathedral and collegiate churches respecful rivalry with slave labour. tively, and the bishops of the dioceses wherein Bill read a third time and passed. they are situate, after consultation with the members of their several chapters, to lay beECCLESIASTICAL Duties and Reve-judgments be best calculated to render each of fore her Majesty such plans as may in their NUES.] On the question that the House those churches, most conducive to the effic resolve itself into a Committee on the ciency of the Established Church,' and to Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Bill, * providing for the cure of souls.'” Mr. Pusey said, it was with diffidence Lord John Russell: I am sorry that the he rose to move an amendment to the hon. Gentleman has throught proper to motion. He was bound to acknowledge make this proposition to the House, as it the authority of the bill, recommended as is one which might be expected to emanate it was by a commission appointed by one from a Member less sincere upon the Government and continued by another. subject than the hon. Member himself. Nevertheless, the numerous representa. I cannot imagine that any other object is tions that had been made against the sought by the motion than delay, and measure were at least entitled to atten. there does not appear to me to be any tion and respect. The chapters had almost reason assigned why the House should not unanimously protested against the bill, proceed with this bill . The commission apnot from interested motives, for they had pointed to consider this subject was appointoffered to give up a part of their revenues, ed by the advice of the right hon. Baronet but from objections they conscientiously opposite (Sir R. Peel) in 1835. That entertained. They objecied to the accu- commission comprised the Archbishop of mulation of the funds of the different Canterbury, the Archbishop of York, the chapters into one fund, and it should be Bishop of London, with other eminent remembered, that those chapters were in preiates, together with persons holding fact corporations, under the existing law, the highest official dignity, all of them as much as any municipal corporation. fully qualified for the task, to which they Another objection was, ihat they con- devoted much time and attention. The ceived the dignities ought to be retained, commissioners made their report on the even if the revenues were taken away. The 24th June, 1836, now little more than practice of every profession showed the four years ago, which report was immedi. necessity for honorary distinction. Iately laid upon the table of the House, was also objected to the bill, that it con- and I brought in a bill founded upon that tained nothing as to the duties of these report. In ihe course of last year, some chapters. Now, as ancient institutions, grave and some lively and facetious they ought either to be let alone altoge. pamphlets were written upon the subject, ther, or, if dealt with at all, substantial and a committee of persons connected duties should be given to their new exist with the different cathedrals baving sat ence. The chapters had lately exerted during the last Session, it was the opinion themselves very much to meet the growing of certain members of the church comdesire for Church instruction, and schools mission, that if that committee had more Barron, H. W. Ellis, W. Barry, G. S Evans, G. Basset, J. Evans, W. Bewes, T. Ewart, W. Blake, W. J. Fielden, J. Bodkin, J. J. Bowes, J. Dundas, C. W. D. Ferguson, Sir R. Ferguson, R. Finch, F. Gillon, W. D. Howard, P. H. Hutt, W. Hutton, R. James, W. Jervis, J. Jervis, S. Langdale, hon. C. Pendarves, E. W. W. Philips, G. R. Rawdon, Col. J. D. Roche, W. Rutherfurd, rt. hn. A. Sandford, E. A. Sheil, rt. hon. R. L. Somerville, Sir W. M. Report received, bill to be engrossed. SUGAR DUTIES.] On the motion for the third reading of the Sugar Duties Bill, Mr. Hume said, that in the last stage of the bill it would be recollected the House refused to reduce the duty on foreign sugar, and on the preceding evening the House refused to permit the passage of free labourers from Bengal and other parts of the East Indies to the Mauritius; since that time the price of sugar had risen very considerably, and it was likely to rise higher still, in consequence of the deficient supply. What he wished, therefore, to know was, whether it was the intention of the noble Lord to take any steps to insure a supply of free labour in those colonies, on which the supply of sugar depended? Lord John Russell said, that the proposition made to the House was the admission of free labour from the East Indies to the Mauritius. The House decided against that proposition, but, as he understood, on information, and not on the ground that it ought to be denied at once and for ever. As he understood that to be the wish of the House, he certainly should not think himself justified in allowing the importation of free labour into the Mauritius, until that further information was received. When that was received it would be for Parliament to say whether it would sanction such a plan. He did not think Government would be justified in advising the Crown to adopt it, until the question had been brought before the House. He was anxious by every legitimate means to increase free labour in our colonies, being convinced it was only by reason of a considerable increase of free labour that we could at all compete or make any successful rivalry with slave labour. Bill read a third time and passed. ECCLESIASTICAL DUTIES AND REVENUES.] On the question that the House resolve itself into a Committee on the Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Bill, Mr. Pusey said, it was with diffidence he rose to move an amendment to the motion. He was bound to acknowledge the authority of the bill, recommended as it was by a commission appointed by one Government and continued by another. Nevertheless, the numerous representations that had been made against the measure were at least entitled to attention and respect. The chapters had almost unanimously protested against the bill, not from interested motives, for they had offered to give up a part of their revenues, but from objections they conscientiously entertained. They objected to the accumulation of the funds of the different chapters into one fund, and it should be remembered, that those chapters were in fact corporations, under the existing law, as much as any municipal corporation. Another objection was, that they conceived the dignities ought to be retained, even if the revenues were taken away. The practice of every profession showed the necessity for honorary distinction. It was also objected to the bill, that it contained nothing as to the duties of these chapters. Now, as ancient institutions, they ought either to be let alone altogether, or, if dealt with at all, substantial duties should be given to their new existence. The chapters had lately exerted themselves very much to meet the growing desire for Church instruction, and schools for the middle classes had been established at Lichfield and other places. He would urge upon the House at least the delay of a year in deference to what he would say was the almost unanimous desire of the clergy of England. The hon. Member concluded by moving, "That an humble address be presented to her Majesty, representing that this House, before proceeding to pass any bill for the regulation of cathedral establishments, desires to receive further information as to the duties and the statutes of the respective foundations, and general purposes, which are contemplated by which the capitular clergy, in conformity therewith, may beneficially discharge; and humbly praying, that her Majesty will be graciously pleased to authorise and direct the visitors of the cathedral and collegiate churches respectively, and the bishops of the dioceses wherein they are situate, after consultation with the members of their several chapters, to lay before her Majesty such plans as may in their judgments be best calculated to render each of those churches, most conducive to the efficiency of the Established Church,' and. to 'providing for the cure of souls.'" Lord John Russell: I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman has throught proper to make this proposition to the House, as it is one which might be expected to emanate from a Member less sincere upon the subject than the hon. Member himself. I cannot imagine that any other object is sought by the motion than delay, and there does not appear to me to be any reason assigned why the House should not proceed with this bill. The commission appointed to consider this subject was appointed by the advice of the right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) in 1835. That commission comprised the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York, the Bishop of London, with other eminent prelates, together with persons holding the highest official dignity, all of them fully qualified for the task, to which they devoted much time and attention. The commissioners made their report on the 24th June, 1836, now little more than four years ago, which report was immedi ately laid upon the table of the House, and I brought in a bill founded upon that report. In the course of last year, some grave and some lively and facetious pamphlets were written upon the subject, and a committee of persons connected with the different cathedrals having sat during the last Session, it was the opinion of certain members of the church commission, that if that committee had more |