National Schools those members of the established church hostility to England, it would be folly and madness to who have hitherto been prevented by conscientious wait for the contingency, however remote, of invasion scruples from availing themselves of the aid so afforded. before making the necessary preparations for our -The Marquis of LANSDOWNE complained that no defence and security.-The Duke of WELLINGTON intimation of the intention of the government to make said he was the last man to hesitate as to the relative this alteration had been given to the House of Commons merits of well-disciplined and half-disciplined troops. before the grant in question was voted.-After some The things were not to be compared at all. You could observations from Earl Grey, the Earl of DERBY have confidence that the disciplined troops would perexpressed his readiness to promise that no money should form what they were ordered to do, while with undisbe applied under the minute until parliament should ciplined troops the chances were that they would do the have had an opportunity of expressing its opinion on the very reverse of what was expected from them. But on subject. this occasion the state of the country must be considered, which, though at peace with all the world, had never, so far as its army was concerned, maintained a proper peace establishment. Let us, then, while we are at peace, make a beginning and return to the militia, our old constitutional peace establishment.-After some observations from Earl GREY, the bill was read a second time.

against the bill so severe, that they would not persevere | be elected by the same constituencies that elected the in requiring the execution of the convention. The purpose of the bill was to carry out a convention agreed to by the late government, and he had naturally anticipated their support.

The New Zealand Bill passed through committee.

In the HOUSE of COMMONS, on Thursday, May 27th, Lord STANLEY, in reply to questions put by Lord D. Stuart and other members, gave full details of the Case of Mr. Murray, the sum of which was, that upon a charge of having connived at murders committed at Ancona, he had been arrested by order of the Papal government, detained in prison from July 1849 until November, 1851, tried by a special tribunal, convicted, and sentenced to death, the execution of which sentence he was, according to the last advices, awaiting at Ancona; and that the British consul at that city had been instructed to use every effort to procure at least a mitigation of the sentence.

On Friday, May 28, some discussion took place respecting the above case. Lord D. STUART thought the British authorities had not paid sufficient attention to the matter to ensure Mr. Murray a fair trial.-Lord STANLEY contended that there was no ground for assuming that Mr. Murray's case had been neglected. At the present time every effort was being made by the British government to protect Mr. Murray from being made the victim of injustice-if any such injustice had been practised towards him.-Lord PALMERSTON gave his willing testimony to the zeal and activity exhibited by the British authorities in the case of Mr. Murray. In reference to British relations with the Court of Rome, he reminded the house that that court had never refused to receive a British minister charged with a specific and temporary duty. The house adjourned to Thursday the 3rd of June.

members of the legislature, and that their salaries should be left to be decided upon by the principal legislature. In reference to the New Zealand land company, he was of opinion that he was bound by the agreement which was sanctioned by the act of 1847. He was not answerable for that agreement, and even if it was a very favourable one for the company, he thought himself bound, nevertheless, to see that the company should not by this bill be placed in a worse position than they were placed in by that act. He would, therefore, not insist on the stipulation that 5s. per acre on all lands sold should be paid to the company, which might affect their interests unfavourably, but would propose that onefourth of the proceeds of all sales of land should be paid to the company. The right hon. baronet drew attention to the likelihood of gold being found in New Zealand, and said that in anticipation of such an event he had drawn up a clause, giving to the local legislatures the power of dealing with the revenues to be thereby derived, in accordance with the rule which the government had I arrived at with respect to the Australian colonies, and the advices relative to which decision he had forwarded to Australia by Thursday's mail.-The house then went into committee. The clauses up to 74 were agreed to, after which the house resumed.

On Monday, June 7th, Mr. BERNAL took occasion to advert to the Calamitous Condition of the Island of Jamaica, through the deficiency of labourers; and to inquire of the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he was prepared to initiate, or promote, or confirm any effort for affording Jamaica, and other colonies in the same category, a proper supply of labour?-Sir J. PAKINGTON said, that the question having been put to him unexpectedly, he could return only a general answer. This subject had engaged his attention long before he had entered into office, and since then he had received from delegates and from other sources painful representations of the distressed condition of the island of Jamaica, and of the particular causes of that distress. The cholera, being a visitation of Providence, did not touch the legislation or policy of this country; but, irrespective of that visitation, he had always thought that the distress of the colonies must be traced in a large degree to the policy adopted by this country in 1846. Upon a careful consideration of the subject, however, her Majesty's government did not think themselves position, in making the case of Jamaica, painful as it was, an exception to the general rule they had laid down. The duties of the Colonial office had been overwhelming, but three or four days ago he had communicated with one of the senior clerks of the West India department of that office, and had desired him, as soon as the pressure of business relaxed, to prepare all the necessary papers, in order that he (Sir John) might direct his attention as speedily as possible to two important points,-the supply of labour, and the present state of the labour laws in the colonies.-The report of the Committee of Supply was then brought up and agreed to.-The house then went again into committee of supply on the Civil Service Estimates, which occupied the remainder of the morning sitting.

On that day the house resumed its sittings. A discussion took place on the subject of the State of Public Business, in the course of which Sir James GRAHAM accused the government of having brought forward a number of measures which were not of immediate urgency, and which could not receive proper deliberation in the course of the present session. After enumerating these bills, he concluded by saying that, if care were not taken, such proceedings would bring re-justified, under the circumstances, and in their present presentative government into disrepute. After some observations from different members, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that on Monday he would state what were the intentions of the government with respect to the public business. The house then went into committee of supply upon the Civil Service Estimates. Certain votes were agreed to, after much discussion, in the course of which a conversation of some interest occurred on the vote for the combined system of National Education in Ireland.-Mr. WALPOLE having disavowed any intention on the part of the government to supersede the system, Sir J. GRAHAM pressed him to say not merely what was not, but what was, their intention. Mr. WALPOLE replied that he thought it was worthy of consideration whether some portion of the grant might not be applied to those who from conscientious motives objected to the present mode of distribution.

At the evening sitting, some explanations were given by Sir J. PAKINGTON as to the negotiations respecting the British American Railway, similar to those given in the house of lords by the Earl of Derby.

On Friday, June 4, on the motion for the house resolving itself into committee on the New Zealand The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in fulfilment Government Bill, Sir John PAKINGTON explained to the of his promise to state the views of the government in house the alterations which he contemplated making in respect to the Business before the House, adverted to the the bill, in order that it might confer upon the colonists speech of Sir J. Graham on Thursday night, which was the best possible government consistent with a due calculated, he said, to arrest public attention, and to regard to imperial considerations. He had received produce considerable effect upon the house. According suggestions from several quarters of the house with a to the right hon. baronet, the state of public business in view to the improvement of the measure, and had had that house was highly unsatisfactory, there being, he some consultation also on the subject with gentlemen stated, a vast accumulation of matters of a highly imfrom New Zealand. He had given an anxious consider-portant and pressing character, whence he had inferred ation to these suggestions and opinions, which related that there was reason to apprehend that representative chiefly to two points-the mode of appointing the super- government itself might be brought into disrepute. Sir intendents, and the manner in which the New Zealand James had very properly laid stress upon the bills for land company was to be dealt with. As regarded the legal reform-the Common Law Procedure Bill, the appointment of the superintendents, he proposed that, Equitable Jurisdiction Bill, and the Masters in Chaninstead of being appointed by the governor, they should cery Abolition Bill; all of which had been read a second

126

THE HOUSEHOLD NARRATIVE.

object was to get rid of the college altogether.
If the
had no objection to a bona fide inquiry, but he did
object to one that was unfair and insulting.
motion was not a mere sham, if an honest inquiry was
really sought, let it be either by a royal commission, or
by the visitors, persons of distinguished rank and cha-
racter, who had an inherent power under the act to
examine upon oath all persons, and into all matters.
With respect to the grant itself-this miserable and
wretched grant, as Mr. Scully termed it--he maintained
that the people of Ireland were entitled to it, not only
upon the ground of compact, but upon the stronger
grounds of policy and justice. To establish this part of
his argument, Mr. Scully produced a long array of his-
torical authorities, which, with a very comprehensive
survey of the character and effects of the penal laws,
and an examination of the history of the Maynooth
college from its first endowment in 1795, occupied the
time until four o'clock, when, though his speech was
still unfinished, by a recent rule of the house, the sitting
terminated.

rested upon parliament alone. Mr. now He fore, objected to the tone and spirit of Mr. Horsman's speech. GLADSTONE, regarding this as mainly a legal question, Having taken upon himself the character of a publie accuser, he was bound to be accurate in the language he used. The wounds of the Church of England were not likely to be healed by rhetorical declamations and misstatements. The first question to be considered was, is the country to be governed, in ecclesiastical and civil matters, by the private opinions of particular men, according to the popularity of the moment; or by a system of fixed law? If the last, had the law been Mr. obeyed? He admitted that it was a great absurdity that there was no provision for the correction of delinquent bishops: but he asserted that the Bishop of Bath and Wells was not a delinquent, that there was not even a presumption of delinquency against him. Gladstone laid much stress upon the sentiments expressed by the parishioners of Frome in favour of Mr. thought, was, that he had become steady in his allegiBennett, the rational inference from which fact, he ance to the church of England. He briefly noticed the proceedings of Mr. Bennett at Kissingen, which, he contended, were not within the proper cognisance of the Bishop of Bath and Wells, and then examined the three A bishop was not at liberty to charges preferred by Mr. Horsman against that right reverend prelate, every one of which, he asserted, was without foundation. refuse institution to a presentee but upon strict legal proof of heretical doctrine, immoral conduct, or defect of learning; he was liable to be called into the Court of Queen's Bench by a writ of Quare impedit, and if he failed In the case of Mr. Bennett no legal ground had been in proving a ground of refusal he suffered in costs. laid before the Bishop of Bath and Wells which would have justified him in refusing or delaying the institution of that gentleman. With respect to the second charge-the want of a certificate from the Bishop of London-he answered that the Bishop of Bath and Wells had received from Mr. Bennett a testimonial the refusal of which would have exposed him to proceedings at law; the explanatory note of the Bishop of London only imposed upon the Bishop of Bath and Wells the duty of ascertaining for himself the doctrines entertained by Mr. Bennett. The third charge was founded, he observed, upon a hideous doctrine of judicial duties, namely, that the "due examinations" to be of such a nature as to satisfy not the bishop, a great public officer, acting judicially, but others upon whom no responsibility was cast. The Bishop of Bath and Wells did examine Mr. Bennett in all those matters which were points of difference between the church of England and that of Rome, and he had been satisfied. Mr. Gladstone investigated certain opinions imputed to Mr. Bennett, which, he argued, contained no theological or legal offence that could justify the As to the motion he objected to its bishop in staying the institution. If they did, why was Mr. Bennett not proceeded against in the ecclesiastical court? terms, which implied censure; and he thought if there was to be an inquiry, it ought to be into the state, spirit, and enactments of the law, which seemed framed to discourage bishops from doing what the Bishop of Bath and Wells was accused of omitting to do.-Sir John PAKINGTON seemed to think the allegations about Mr. Bennett seriously backed by evidence; but he doubted the fitness and propriety of the house of commons as a tribunal for such an inquiry. He expressed his astonishment at Mr. Gladstone's justification of Mr. Bennett's abstinence from orthodox churchgoing, at Kissingen, when the whole family to which he was chaplain was only Sir John Harrington, "the churchwarden of St Paul's, Knightsbridge, who distinguished himself more by zeal than discretion in Mr. Bennett's case with the Bishop of London."-Sir Page WOOD did not dispute the power of the house to make the inquiry; but he urged on members that it behoved them, as the great inquest of the nation, to act with a judicial mind. He argued that the bishop could not in this case, consistently with his duty, have done anything The Kissingen facts he assured the else than what he did. The charge of indecent haste he disposed of by information as to the legal formalities of procedure.

At the evening sitting, Mr. HORSMAN, in moving for a select committee to inquire into the circumstances connected with the the Institution of the Rev. Mr. Bennett to the Vicarage of Frome, referred to what had occurred at a previous debate upon this subject, which, he contended, showed clearly and distinctly that his motion was understood to be directed, not against Mr. Bennett, but against the Bishop of Bath and Wells. The result of the bona fide inquiry promised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was that it was doubtful whether, under the Clergy Discipline Act, Mr. Bennett could be made amenable; but in regard to the Bishop of Bath and Wells, it was acknowledged that there was no redress whatever at law against him for instituting After giving some further details in Mr. Bennett. vindication and corroboration of the statements he had made as to the proceedings of Mr. Bennett at Kissingen, and his alleged Romanist tendencies, Mr. Horsman addressed himself to the conduct of the Bishop of Bath and Wells, in comparison with whose acts, he said, those of Mr. Bennett were perfectly insignificant. What he had already charged against the bishop fell short of the truth. He had instituted Mr. Bennett in a manner and with a haste which showed a determination to shut out the parishioners of Frome from the legal redress which they would have had if more time had been allowed; he had done it without the certificate from Mr. Bennett's former diocesan, which by law he was under an obligation to require, and without that due examination of the presentee which was enjoined by law, and which the parishioners had a right to demand. All this was done, he averred, not accidentally or carelessly, but advisedly, and in order to defeat the ends of justice. In support of these charges, Mr. Horsman entered into a minute exposition of the proceedings in connection with the institution of Mr. Bennett, in the course of which he read a letter from the Bishop of London, appended to the certificate, in favour of Mr. Bennett, of three beneficed clergymen in his diocese, which acquitted this right reverend prelate, he observed, of being a party in misleading or deceiving the Ascertaining from the Bishop of Bath and Wells. judicial opinion of Lord Ellenborough the legal import of the words "due examination," Mr. Horsman insisted that the avowed and published sentiments of Mr. Bennett imposed upon the diocesan, before instituting him, the obligation of requiring an explanation-some of those sentiments touching the supremacy of the crown in spiritual matters, and that such explanation should have Instead, however, of demeaning been made public. himself as an impartial judge, the Bishop of Bath and Wells, he alleged, had sunk the dignity of that office in the littleness of the partisan. The question then was, It had been admitted by the what is to be done? government that the importance of the subject could not be exaggerated; and no other mode of inquiry being available, he was driven, after long delay, to propose a parliamentary committee. There was no duty of parliament more obvious than, when it had established a church for the teaching of one religion, to take care that it should not be made subservient to the doctrines of another. The responsibility of this question, there

are

government on the subject. He had communicated with the head of the government and with the highest authorities of the church, and had now to state that the government were willing to undertake, and would undertake the consideration of the subject, with reference to capitular bodies and cathedral institutions, so as to make them more extensively and practically useful than they are at present-so as to extend the spiritual instruction and education which might advantageously be afforded by those bodies. There were four essential points of detail in the bill. First, the abolition of deaneries, and the consolidation of the office of dean with the office of bishop; secondly, the further reduction of the number of canonries; thirdly, by means to be acquired through these alterations, to add to the episcopate of the country; fourthly, to make provision for the better management of episcopal and capitular revenues. For the abolition of the deans he saw no reason; he doubted whether, with a view to keeping up cathedral institutions in sufficient force, the number of canonries could be reduced further; the increase of the episcopate he thought very desirable, if a fund for the purpose can be found. It should be an object to relieve these high officers of the church, as far as possible, from the cares and troubles of all worldly and temporal affairs, but at the same time to preserve the property in such connection with them as not to leave them mere dependents and stipendiaries of the state.-Sir Robert INGLIS corrected the opposition as to an impression they might have been under with respect to the sentiment they had just cheered: Mr. Walpole did not mean to separate the church from the state, nor to remove bishops from In the course of the discussion on the ministerial statement, Mr. Sydney HERBERT said that in church reform his own opinions probably went beyond those of any around him. He was not one who thought a very large addition to the episcopate necessary: one of the causes of the desire for an augmentation is that the bishops are in a situation they ought not to be in, that of land-agents for the ecclesiastical commissioners. The recent establishment of St. Aidan's college at Birkenhead showed that institutions with the duties which the chapters were appointed to perform are a requirement of the present age.-The Marquis of BLANDFORD accepted willingly the undertaking of the government, both because that course met the sense of the house, and from his personal inclination. The order for a second reading was discharged.

house that the bishop was not competent to inquire into because they would not have been a competent legal justification to any steps he founded on them. The quotations from Mr. Bennett's books would not have made a good legal defence to a Quare impedit nor would the Bishop of London's letter: if Mr. Bennett had answered that he was at the time of examination an attached and sincere member of the church of England, and had explained away the doctrines complained of, the bishop had no alternative but to institute him. But, though glad thus to be delivered from the consideration of Mr. Bennett's case, he had in fact formed his opinion of it. He admitted that it was a considerable grievance, that in the case of a clergyman lying under such suspicion as Mr. Bennett did, from the things which were said to have occurred abroad, and from admitted passages in his books, which had not been cited in this debate,-he admitted that it was a grave thing that, under the existing state of the law, there was no power on the part of a bishop to refuse to institute such a person; and he confessed he looked to a reform of the law in that respect both in principle and practice; for the present house of commons having shown itself so anxious about the reform of the Court of Chancery, he felt certain that the next house of commons would not allow the ecclesiastical courts to pass unscathed. The present debate might tend to promote that result; and if so, it would be a useful result, and perhaps the only useful result it would have.-Colonel BOYLE addressed the house for certain of the parishioners in Frome, in favour of the motion. Colonel YORKE followed him on the other side, on behalf of the parishioners who support Mr. Bennett. the house of lords. [Mr. Walpole signified assent.]The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then endeavoured to dissuade the house from adopting the motion. He took the general disposition of the house to be one of extreme reluctance by any vote to throw a censure on the conduct of the Bishop of Bath and Wells; for they had seen that had the bishop thrown any difficulties in the way of Mr. Bennett's institution, he might, and very probably would, have incurred very perilous consequences. At the same time, Mr. Disraeli took the liberty to say, that if the law did not provide a remedy, -a fact, however, which he still doubted, then it would be the duty of the house to endeavour to supply one; and if there were not-which in his mind there certainly was not-sufficient facility, or sufficient opportunity, for parishioners to obtain relief and redress, that was a fit subject for their inquiry and legislation. But the committee asked for would not have the function, or, at this time of the session, the opportunity, to make the necessary inquiry with satisfactory effect. Avowing in general terms that the state of our ecclesiastical courts cannot be much longer continued, and that the government is prepared sooner or later to act on that sentiment, he expressed his hope that Mr. Horsman would not ask the house to divide on his motion.-The SOLICITOR-GENERAL hoped that those who had devoted their attention to the measures for the improvement of the proceedings in our courts of common law and equity would extend the benefits of their inquiry to the ecclesiastical courts of this country.-Mr. WALPOLE stated that at the end of Mr. Horsman's speech the members of the government examined attentively the terms of the motion to see if it would bear the construction of being suggestive of an inquiry into the law, to which they were not averse; but after the speech which introduced it, they could only regard it as directed against the bishop.-On this Mr. GOULBURN moved an amendment, to make the inquiry of the committee simply "into the state of the law respecting the appointment to benefices."-Mr. HORSMAN opposed this amendment: it was (he said) like proposing to inquire into the criminal law on a trial for murder.-The house divided on a question involving the point whether or not the original motion should be altered. The numbers were 156 to 111 against altering the original proposition; majority of Mr. Horsman against ministers, 45. The original motion for a select committee was then put substantively, and agreed to.

On Wednesday June, 9, the Marquis of BLANDFORD moved the second reading of the Episcopal and Capitular Revenues Bill.—Mr. WALPOLE stated the intentions of

On the order, moved by Lord R. Grosvenor, for going into committee upon the County Elections Polls Bill, Mr. PACKE moved that it be deferred for six months. He had heard, he said, but two reasons for one day's county poll: first, that bribery was promoted by a second day's poll, which he believed was not the case; second, that the second day increased the expense of candidates. This he admitted; but the convenience of candidates, he thought, was not to be purchased by curtailing the franchise of the constituency. In close county contests, one day would not suffice for the polling.-Mr. ALCOCK supported the bill.-Mr. WALPOLE considered that this question rather concerned county members than the government; at the same time, he was not prepared individually to offer any opposition to the committal of the bill.-The motion for going into committee was supported by Mr. B. Denison, Mr. W. Brown, and Mr. L. King, and opposed by Mr. Henley, Mr. Fellowes, Mr. Deedes, and Colonel Sibthorp. -The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not think there was a pressing necessity for the measure at this moment. He thought the limitation of the polling to a single day very desirable, and would not oppose the motion if a proper machinery could be provided for the alteration in time for the next election; but apprehending considerable inconvenience from adopting the proposal at the approaching election, he should oppose it.-Mr. COBDEN observed that the principle of the bill being admitted, the objections were for the committee.-The original motion was opposed by Sir B. Bridges, and supported by Mr. Bouverie, Mr. W. Miles, and Mr. Oswald. Upon a division, it was carried by 166 against 82. The house then went into committee on the bill, but the proceedings were interrupted by the Disorderly Conduct