Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
15 articles on this Page
PENANCE IN A PARISH CHURCH.
PENANCE IN A PARISH CHURCH. CAMBRIDGE, MAY parish of Fen Ditton, about two miles from this place, has been the scene of most extraordinary and disgraceful doings this morning. In conformity with a sentence lately passed in the Arches' Court by Sir Herbert Jemier Fust, a man named Edward Smith, a gardener and the village fiddler, was to stand and do penance in the parish church for defamation. The suit was a cause of defamation, Sromoted by Mrs. Martha James, the wifeof the Rev. William rown James, Rector of Fen Ditton, against Edward Smith, for having in the months of April and May, 1848, charged Mrs. James with the crime of adultery. It was proved that Smith had at a public-house in the village of Ditton, when "half drunk and half foolish," used the defamatory words imputed, and the averments of the libel having been proved, judgment was prayed and granted, to the effect that the usual penance should be performed in the parish church of Fen Ditton, on Sunday, May 6. Smith was also condemned in costs, which amount to £42 17s. 6d. The subject has been the matter of talk in the county round since the passing of the sentence, and between the hours of nine and eleven o'clock (the time fixed for the commencement of the service, the thoroughfares leading to Ditto.i from Cambridge and other adjacent places were crowded with passengers, and there were not less than 3,000 persons in the village before the bells had done chiming. The majority of these were, of course, members of the lower orders. The churchyard was crowded, and as soon as the doors were ooen a rush took place into the edifice that would have dis- graced the upper gallery of a theatre in London on a Boxing- night, and every, uvailtiliio. opot-.vac onp.nnied in less than live minutes. The screen was covered by men (bargees; sitting astride, the capitals of the pillars had each their human occu- pant, and Ditton church, which is computed to be capable of seating 1,000 persons, was crowded to suffocation, the majority of the audience standing upon seats, and eagerly fighting for the places which would command the best view of the place where it was supposed Smith would stand. The Rev. A. 1I. Small, of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, was the gentleman who had undertaken to do duty for the rector on the occasion, and he entered the church exactly at eleven o'clock, followed by Mr. James aid his wife, the promoter of the suit. Mr. and Mrs. James took their seats in the rector's pew, and the service commenced. All eves were strained to get a glimpse of Sirs. James and the officiating minister had no sooner commenced, than he vvas saluted with a shout of Spaalc up, old boy," and a chorus of laughter and similar interruptions were continued throughout. The hymns were omitted by the special request of the5rector, made to Mr. Small, at an interval in the service. Small, having concluded the prayers, entered the pulpit, and taking his text from the 7th chapter of Matthew, v. 1, Judge not, lest ye be judged," proceeded to the delivery of an impressive discourse, interrupted by the breaking of win- dow's by the mob outside, cat-calls, whistles, laughter, and other unseemly noises, which increased as he proceeded, until his voiee was finally drowned, partly by the noise inside, and partly by that outside, consequent upon a dog-fight which had baen got up in the churchyard. The interest excited by this g tve way in its turn to that excited by a cry of Smith is coming," several times reiterated, and the struggle that ensued for places commanding a view of the aisle, up which he was to proceed to his appointed position opposite the reading-desk, baffles all description. At last his veritable appearance was announced by a shout from the parties outside, and a complete stop was pelt to the sermon. At this time there were several parties smoking in the body of the church, as the smoke was seen rising towards the roof, and a small of tobacco was patent to all. The shout outside subsided as Smith entered the church, but was taken up by its occupants with three hearty cheers, clapping of hands, whoops, and other discordant sounds. On his' reaching the reading-desk, the press was so great that he had to be liftcLrinto the pew of the churchwardens on men's arms, and, when there, he was mounted on a hassock placed on a seat immediately facing the pew of the Rev. Mr. James. Nothing but this would satisfy the audience, and quiet was in some degree restored by Smith waving over his head the paper from which he was to read his recantation. Mr. Small essayed & continuance of his discourse repeatedly, but was as often met it by cries of "Smith, Smith, one cheer more for Smith," the s.iid cheer having been most heartily given, and Smith as often e calling silence for the minister." This uproar continued, and th-sn Smith beckoned to Mr. Kent, one of the churchwardens, sad asked him what was to be done, saying, You see what a tlie church is in; you know what is best; I am your prisoner, and will do as you think proper." While this obser- vation was making, a broom, which had been found in the corner of the church, flew across it, and fell within a yard of the pulpit, then came a hassock, then another the pews were then broken, and the pieces were flung in all directions the hassocks came thick as hail, being evidently aimed at Mr. Small and Smith, who, by this time, were standing close toge- ther, the one reading and the other listening to the recantation, Mr. Small having closed his book, and descended from the pulnit for the purpose of hearing it, as the only means of pre- venting the total demolition of the interior fittings of the edifice, which at one time seemed inevitable. It was impossible to hear a word Smith said; and it is doubtful whether Mr. Small did, for the reporter of this narrative was within half a yard of the pair. Mr,. Small had no sooner left the pulpit than it was occupied bv spectators, who maintained their position there to the end of the proceedings. At last a hassock struck Mr. Small, and at the sanie moment Smith concluded reading his recantation, and moved out of the pew to leave the charch. On his setting his foot on the stones of the aisle, he was taken up by the mob, amidst shouts of Bravo Smith, well done Smith," an.1 the most hearty cheers, and carried out on men's shoulders. On his way to the "Plough, to which lie repaired, lie was called npon for a speech, and in reply, said to the immense crowd which was besetting him, I am sorry I cannot ask the whole of vou home to dinner, but I am a poor man. On his way through the village the inhabitants rushed out to shake hands with him, and on his entering the Plough the house was imme- d'1 ely filled with his admirers, who consumed the remainder of the afternoon in smoking and drinking on the green.
P.u:i.S vVnoLB DUTY, &c.-TLe Window-tax.Punch.
EYENTS IN INDIA.
EYENTS IN INDIA. The following chronological summary of the chief political events, taken from the Petnbrokeshire Herald, on our north-west frontier will be found interesting 10 1748. Upon the first invasion of India by Ahmed Shah, king of Afghanistan, the Sikhs were a powerless sect of mili- tary fanatics, under the government of Meer Munnoo, an agent of the Great Mogul of Dehli. Ahmed Shah, having de- feated the Mogul, compelled Munnoo to hold the Punjaub as tributary to the throne of .Caubul. He enforced a similar concession from the chief of Moultan. 1752. Ahmed Shah quells a rebellion in the Punjaub. 1756. Ahmed Shah's second invasion of India. He sacks Delhi, and obtains the hand of one of the daughters of the Great Mogul for his son Timoor. The Punjaub is ceded by the Great Mogul as the marriage portion. 1758. The Sikhs, assisted by the Mahrattas, revolt against the Affghans, take Lahore and Moultan, and drive Timoor over the Indus. The Mahrattas become the masters of the Punjaub. 1759. Ahmed Shah's third invasion of India. He drives the Mahrattas out of the Punjaub, defeats them at Baudlee, and takes Delhi; they retake it in the course of the year. 1761. Ahmed Shah cripples the Mahratta power by the victory of Pannput. 1762. He drives the Sikhs out of the plain country of the Punjaub. 1767. He is compelled to perform the same task, but they resume their position on his return to Caubul, and increase in importance. 1768. They take the fort of Rotass from the Affghans. 1773. Ahmed Shah dies, and is succeeded by Timoor. 1780. Runjeet Singh, son of Mala Singh, a Sikh chief, born. 1781. Timoor Shah besieges and takes the fort of Moultan, which had fallen by treachery into the hands of the Sikhs. 1788. He quells revolts in Cashmere and Bahawulpur.I 1793. Timoor Shah dies, and is succeeded by his son Zeman. 1794. Zeman Shah resettles Cashmere. 1795. He invades the Punjaub, drives the Sikhs beyond the Hyphasis, and retakes the fort of Rotass. 1797. He again marches to Lahore where he receives the allegiance of several Sikh chiefs. He threatens India, but eventually retires to Affghanistan. 1798. He again invades the Punjaub. Runjeet Singh, who has become the acknowledged head of the Sikhs, does homage. 1799. A British embassy is sent to Persia, in order to re- quest that Court to induce Zeman Shah to suspend his threa- tened invasion of India for three years! 1800. Zeman is deposed and blinded by his half-brother Mahmood. 1801. Bahawulpur acknowledges Mahmood Shah, and Cash- mere pays him tribute. 1803. Mahmood is deposed by his half-brother Shuja. 1805. Shah Shuja reduces Cashmere. The Mahratta under Holkar are driven by Lord Lake to Sutledge. Runjeet Singh refuses to harbour them, and makes his first treaty with us on December 21th, 1807. Runjeet Singh besieges Moultan without success. 1808. The fear of a French invasion induces Lord Minto to send Mr. Metcalfe on a mission to Runjeet Singh and in 1809. Our second treaty with that prince is concluded on the 25th April. Mr. Eiphinstone is sent 0:1 a mission to Shah Shuja, and is favourably received at Peshawur, after hospitable treatment at Bahawulpur and Moultan. Mahmood regains the throne of Caubul; and Shuja flies to Lahore, where he is detained, and robbed of the Kond-noor diamond by Runjeet Singh. 1810. Runjeet Singh besieges Moultan a second time, with- out success. 1811. Bhawul Khan II. dies, and is succeeded by his son, Sadih Mohammed Khan. 1812. Runjeet Singh helps the Affghans to take Attock but afterwards retains it for himself. 1813. lIe defeats Mahmood Shah's troops in their attempt to retake it. 1814r. Runjeet Singh falls in an expedition against Cashmere. 1815. Shuja escapes from Lahore, and takes refuge in Bri- tish territory, in Loodianah. 1818. One of Ruajeet Singh's generals storms and takes Moultan. Mahmood is deposed, and the Dooranee dynasty subverted at Caubul by the Barukzyes. 1819. Runjeet Singh reduces Cashmere, and extorts tribute from the AfFghan governor at Peshawar. 1821. Bahawulpur becomes tributary to Runjeet Singh. 1823. The Affghans fail in an attempt to regain Peshawur, which thenceforth became a Sikh province. 1825. The present ruler of Bahawulpur, Mohammed Bha- wul Khan, succeeds his father. lid W. B&tin! r.5f a!lS with 1834. Shuja advances, against Dost Mahommed (Baruk- ssye), now King of Caubul, but is defeated, and again retires to Loodianah. 1835. March 5. Lord W. Bentinck enters into a sup- plementary treaty with Baliavvulpur. 1835. Dost Mahommed makes overtures to Lord Auckland in order to procure assistance m recovering Peshawur from the Sikhs. 1837. Dost 1íllnommel treats with Russia; Capt. Burnes is sent to Caubul, but the mission fails, because the British Government refuse to favour the Dost's designs against Peshawur.. 1833. June 23. Tripartite Treaty between Lord Auckland, Shuja, and Runjeet Singh. Oct. 22. A treaty with Bahawulpur, by which it places itself under British protection. 1839. June 27. Runjeet Singh dies, and is succeeded by his eldest son, Khurrah Singh. July 22. Ghuzne taken by the British. August 7. Caubul taken, and Shah Shuja installed. Nov. :30. Khurruh Singh of Lahore is poisoned by an intrigue of his son Yuzeer, Gholab Singh. At the King's funeral, his son Noil Nehal is accidentally killed. The Queen-Mother Chand Kour Ranee succeeds. 1840. Nov. 3. Dost Mahommed surrenders himself a prisoner to Sir W. M'Naughten. 1841. The Ranee of Lahore is deposed by Shere Singh, a reputed son of Runjeet Singh. Nov. 23. Sir William M'Naughten is murdered at Caubul. 1842. Jan. 6. The British troops evacuate Caubul. Dost Mahommed is liberated. 1843. Sept. 15. Shere Singh is murdered by a plot of his Yuzeer, Dhyan Singh, and the Yuzeer's brother, Gholab Singh. He is succeeded by Dhuleep Singh, a child who had been falsely acknowledged by Runjeet Singh as his son. 1845. Dhuleep Singh's mother embroils the Punjaub to so great an extent, that the Sikh troops are only pacified by a per- mission to invade British India.. Nov. 24. They march from Lahore with 50,000 troops and 108 guns. Dec. 10. They cross the Sutledge at Sobraon. Dec. 18. Battle of Moodkoe. 1846. Jan. 23. Battle of Feb. 10. Battle of Sobraon. — 15. The Sikh envoys oiler to treat. March 9. Lord Hardinge concludes a treaty with Dhuleed Singh, by the provisions of which we agree to govern the coun- try during the Maharajah's minority, and assign over Cash- mere as an independent kingdom to Gholab Singh, the chief conspirator in the murder of thahBt two Sikh monarchs.
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—HUMAN SUFFERINGS ALLEVIATED. — It would require a very large volume to recount the delightful effects produced by that celebrated medicine, "Worsdell's Pills, prepared by JOHN KATE, Esq., of Dalton Hall, near Hudders- tield. In cases of diseased members, such as ulcerated limbs, boils, &c., no medicine can be more speedy in effecting a radical cure.—Mr. J. Julian, Fairmantle-strcet, Truro,was afflicted with a bad leg for more than fifty years, during which period he re- sorted to every remedy that held out the least hope of success. By the free and continued use of Kayo's W orsdell's Pills, his series of wounds of fifty years' standing have been soundly and completely healed.— Mrs. Anne Kield, Massley Brow, after suf- fering many years fronva bad log, by taking Kaye's \Vorsdeh s Pills'for a short time, was sufficiently recovered' to be able to walk to Oldham and back in one day. The son of W. Rowe, Bojugan, St. Just, was afflicted for a' considerable period wuU King's Evil. Groat expense was' incurred .for medical advice, but without success. Kaye's Worsdell's Pills were successful in accomplishing a complete cure, to the astonishment of all acquaintance.—Mr. J. ■Hannafvrd, South Brant, near Totnes, was nearly covered with painful blotches and boils. Two boxes of Kaye's Worsdell's Pills effected a complete cure.—31. Osborne, Innkeeper, Market-place, Chester, writes,—" For eight years I was a severe sufferer with ulcerated legs, and swelling and pain in my ancles. I obtained advice from Chester, Liverpool, and Manchester, but without effect. I then commenced the use of your pills, and am quite cured. For the sake of others, you are at liberty to make use of my name." E. Toms, Bigbury, near Modbury, Devon, by using these pills, was cured of scurvy and swellings in various parts of the body. Sold in boxes, Is. lid., 2s. 9d., and 4s. 6d. each, by Barelay s, Farringdon-street; Sutton's, Bow-churchvard; Edwards, St. Paul's-churchyard, and all medicine venders.
. HOUSE OF LORDS.—THURSDAY,…
HOUSE OF LORDS.—THURSDAY, MAY 3. NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND). The Bishop of CASHEL presented a petition, signed by 43,003 of the Protestants of Ireland, praying for an alteration of the pre- sent system of national education also a petition, signed by up- wards of 1,300 clergymen of the Established Church in Ireland, of a similar nature. The right rev. prelate complained of the hardship inflicted on the Protestants of Ireland by the present system, and complained that no grant was specially made to edu- cation in direct connexion with the Establishment. The Archbishop of DUBLIN vindicated the conduct of the board which had the control over the present system. If the plan of the petitioners were carried out, there would be many parishes where no education would be provided for the children of Protes- tant parents, as it was obvious, from their small numbers in many parts of the country, that it would be impossible to have a school in every parish (hear). The Bishop of LONDON (who was all but inaudible) was un- derstood to condemn the national education system, as did the Earl of WINCHELSEA and after a few words from Lord LANS- DOWNE in support of it, the House adjourned at eight.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY,…
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY, MAY 3. Lord J. RUSSELL postponed until some day next week the going into committee on the Advances of Money to Ireland Bill, fixed for Friday.
MARRIAGES BILL. Mr. GOULBURN moved as an amendment (Mr. S. WORTLEY having moved the second leading of this bill) that it be read a second time that day six months. The right hon. gentleman con- tended that if the House acceded to this bill, and removed the barrier which now existed in the way of such marriages as were chiefly contemplated by the measure, they could not stop there, but must go farther, and abolish all restrictions in the way of marriages between parties within certain degrees of affinity, and leave consanguinity alone to constitute the prohibited degrees (hear, hear). He did not think that the House was prepared to carry the matter to such a length. If it was not, let it pause upon the threshold, and reject the bill before it. Whilst a marriage between a man and his deceased wife's sister was contrary to the Divine law, and at war with every prudential social consideration, no plea had been made out for it on the ground of public neces- sity. He had also serious objections to the bill, resting upon the disastrous effect which it would have upon the domestic relations, and upon the anomalous position in which it would place the clergy of the Church. He hoped that the House would give to the bill, in all its important bearings, a full and cautious consi- deration, before coming to the decision of sanctioning it by its vote. They could stand where they were without much inconve- nience, but if they moved forward a step, it, was impossible to es- timate the evil consequences which such a course might entail upon the social and domestic relations of the country (hear). Mr. M. MILNES did not see, even admitting the opinion of the Church of England to be against the marriages in question, how that opinion was to be held binding upon the other denominations of Christians (hear). He besought the House, on weighty social considerations, to give its sanction to the bill. The Ear! of ARUNDEL observed, that were it not thai the Roman Catholic Church regarded such a marriage as not an infraction of the law of God, no dispensation would ever be given to permit it to take place. He regarded the restriction now existing as unjust to such Roman Catholics as were conscientiously married under dispensations, to the great body of Dissenters, and to a large body- in the Church- of England itself. He admitted that there was a difference of opinion amongst Roman Catholics on the subject but this difference did not extend to the religious question in- volved. Mr. COCKBURN asked if the marriages in question were in vio- lation of the law of God, why was not the law which they contra- vened pointed out (hear) ? What the Divine law prohibited was marriage with a wife's sister during the lifetime of the wife. The special prohibition of an act under particular and specified cir- cumstances, was equivalent to a sanction of the act in all other circumstances (hear). Let not the House be guided in its deci- sion on this grave question by the conflicting opinions of Church- men, but deal with it broadly, on social, moral, and religious grounds. The hon. gentleman then traced the present state of the law to its origin, in the time of Henry VIII., an origin both unholy and polluted. Throughout the rest of Europe, Protestant and Catholic, such marriages were permitted. In England alone were they prohibited, and that in deference to a law passed by a servile Parliament to pander to the tyranny and the lust of a royal debauchee (cheers). He concluded by imploring the House not to reject a measure which was sanctioned by the Divine law, by the practice and usages of nearly the" hole Christian world, and -I <■:— .1,1.. L.n nnnn flip nf f'1inil1P and society (cheers). Mr. R, PALMER thought it indisputable that the law, as it now stood, was violated, and that the Legislature could not remain in- different to a breach of the law. If the law in question was one which was certain to be violated, it should be repealed, unless they had the highest sanction for its continuance. On the motion of Mr. BUN BUB Y the deba'e was then adjourned. After a discussion on the nomination of the Dublin Savings' Banks Committee, The House adjourned it one.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FEIDAY,…
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FEIDAY, MAY 4. LAND IMPROVEMENT AND DRAINAGE OF IRELAND. The House resolved itself into committee. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proposed certain ad- vances fur that object from the Consolidated iund. He described, as upon former occasions, the deplorable condition of the labour- ing population, and urged the necessity of furnishing them with the means of deriving a subsistence from other sources than elee- mosynary aid. The extinction of the vicious system under which this calamitous state of things had grown up, he observed, could not be Accomplished at once by any legislative measures, since it involved an entire change in the social condition und habits of all I classes, the landlords having hitherto depended for their rents upon the small tenantry-, whose only means of v, ere their small potato laiids, to which they clung with iminc.ble tenacity, bymptoms of amendment, in the most wholesome fotm—-individual energy and exertion—had appeared in many parts of Itc west of Ireland, in the employment of the people upon the laud. ThU, he believed, was what Ireland really wanted, and it was worth the while of this country to make pecuniary advances with that view. The first purpose, therefore, for which he asked for an advance was in the wholesome form provided by the Land Im- provement Act, and lie proposed to add £ 300,000 to the remain- ing fund ( £ 900,000, available for future years) at the disposal of the Loan Commissioners, wh.ch they- might advance this year to landlords to enable them to improve their estates under that act. Another mode of employment was arterial drainage; and the whole sum which could be advantageously expended upon that class of work during the present year was about £270,000. The total repayments for relief works amounted to of which sum Elcib,oco would be re-is-uaL'ie under the act of last session, and he proposed to add the sum of £ 200,000.- He had intended to propose a vote in order to carry on the Great Western railroad but he'had suspended that proposition until in-had an opportunity of communicating wivh the pasties connected with that undertak- ing. His propositions were therefore limited to the advance of £ 300,000 under the Land Improvement Act, and £ 200,000 for arterial drainage, under the Drainage Act. Mr. FRENCH entered at some length into the general policy of this system of advances, which he condemned, preferring that the landlords of Ireland should be left to themselves rather than that they should be dealt with as they had been under such a system. Mr. TRELAWNY opposed the resolution, protesting against this system of endless advancea. If he had any guarantee thfit the die- tress in Ireland was diminishing, or had reason to hope that this would be the last grant, he would be disposed to concede something but there was no end to advances; Ireland was a vortex which swallowed up English money, and he thought he did less harm than good to the Government by opposing the resolution, which would enable them to resist the importunity of Irish members. Sir H. BARRON made an indignant reply to the unpalatable re- marks of, the member for Tavistock, reproaching him with igno- rance of the frightful condition of the Irish people, and of the nature of the resolution itself, which was for a loan, not a grant, and which he supported. Mr. REYNOLDS expressed his unmixed satisfaction at the speech and plan of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which would be re- ceived with gratitude in Ireland. The resolution was agreed to.
THE MARRIAGES BILL.
THE MARRIAGES BILL. The adjourned debate on the Marriages Dill was then resumed, after an attempt to prevent its renewal at so late an hour, which was negatived on a division by 116 against 25. Mr. E. H. BUNBURY considered that it was on the Divine law alone that the prohibition of these marriages could rest, and if that law had been clear this question would never have been mooted but the text of that law was open to so many interpreta- tions by different sets of theologians, that it could be no founda- tion for a municipal law creating a civil disability. The more he considered this great divergence of opinion on the subject of the degrees of affinity the more he was convinced that it could arise but from one cause, namely, that the feelings of mankind revoked against a prohibition which tended to demoralise the humbler classes. Sir G. GREY wished to state the reasons which induced him to vote for the second reading of this bill. He should not enter into the theological part of the question, not undervaluing iu import- ance, but believing that the question, whether these marLilges were or were not prohibited by the law of God, was not likely to receive a very satisfactory solution by a decision of that House. Each member must satisfy his own mind and conscience upon this point; if he was convinced that there existed such a prohibi- tion, he admitted that this concluded the question, and that such member was not at liberty to consider the social argument; but if lie believed there was no such prohibition, or that the question w s left by the Scripture involved in doubt and uncertainty, he was at liberty to look at it with reference to social considerations. Ha (Sir George) believed that the evidence as to any prohibition byethe law of God was inconclusive; he thought there was no sue h prohibition, and that he was at liberty to consider the ques- tion as one of social expediency, with relation to its practical ef- Lets upon the community. With regard to the authority of the Church, if that meant the early Fathers, or General Councils, or ecclesiastical authority before the Reformation, he did not attach much weight to that authority, which would involve us in a maze of prohibitions contrary to right principles and abhorrent to the feelings of society. If by ecclesiastical authority was meant the decisions of the Reformers, or the law of the Established Church, he did not see how this authority could be imposed upon ail mem- bers of the community, whether belonging to that Church or not. This bill prescribed no obligation it merely relieved those who d.id not recognise the authority of the Church, whom it left at l'baty to obey the dictates of their own conscience. With regard to the effects of the prohibition upon society, he thought the great preponderance of argument and uf fact was in favour of an altera- tion of the law, though he felt the force of many of the objections upon the point urged by Mr. Palmer but it was incumbent noon the House to consider the effects of the law uf 1835, which gave n legislative sanction retrospectively to such marriages, and thereby dulled the sense of their moral guilt, and all the evidence showed that they had not been put an end to by that act. He urged that, besides the immoralities and practical evils created by the present state of the law, it led to the commission of perjury and although the question was embarrassed with difficulties, and, perhaps, 1t would have been better had it not been agitated at all, yet, having been mooted, he felt bound, as an inihvidu :l member, to vote for the bill. Sir R. IXGLIS contended that the gensral principle of theDivh.o law was that a man may not marry any one of kin to him; an.! Mr. Cockburn's argument that. what was not expressly prohibited was permitted, would sanction a man's marriage with his owi daughter. This was not only a theological and scriptural ques- tion, but one of ecclesiastical authority, and clergymen of the Church of England were bound to consider what scripture said as interpreted by their own Church, and Mr. Wortley would nut maintain that his bill was rot repugnant to the doctrines of the Church of England as well as of the Church of Scotland. A point of immense importance was what was the opinion of the wo.neu of Engbnd upon this question, which was a woman's question. As far as he" had had an opportunity of ascertaining the fact, the women of England were in immense proportion opposed to th.s measure. If it was true, as lie believed, that this measure was it was contrary to' tlie^mind'VncrWfif'iyr ills tei^ersaf"C'huVctf. which were coincident upon this subject alone iftlJis %vas a woman's question, and the opinion of the women of England was strong against the change, he implored the House not to disturb the pie- s>cnt state of tilings by passing this bill Oi the motion of Mr. NAPIER the debate was again adjourned until Tuesday. The House adjourned at half-past twelve o'clock.
HOUSE OF TO-ND,' Y, MAY 7.
HOUSE OF TO-ND,' Y, MAY 7. Petitions were presented by the Duke of BK AD FORT from the owners and occupicrs of land in Gloucestershire, and from the merchants and shipowners at Swansea, in Glamorganshire, and at Newport, in Monmouthshire, against the repeal of the Navigation- laws.
THE NAVIGATION-LAWS. The Marquis of LAXSDOWNE rose to move the second reading ot U;e bill to repeal the Navigation-laws, and having expressed ins respect for the feelings and honest prejudices of those who were opposed to him on the question, proceeded to prove that the per- manence and security of the national wealth would not, acceniir g to the experience which our present knowledge of the subject af- forded, and according to all Kour.d reasoning based upon i:, i e subject to any danger from the proposed bill, or Le impaired in any respect by its provisions. In a rapid sketch of the history the Navigation-laws from the time of Richard II. to the prese: t day, he showed how those laws, while they acted as an impedi- ment to commerce, had Jong ceasfd to Le of any use to the navy of the country, and entering upon the statistics of the shipping trade, proved that British shipowners might confidently rely upon being able to maintain their ground against the competition of foreign shipping, If the House looked at the colonial part of the questi JP, it would find that the true interests of the colonies, and especially of the West Indies, called for the repeal of that remnant of the Navigation-laws which still remained in force. Lord BROUGHAM opposed the bill, and especially warned the House not to believe implicitly in the statistics of noble mar- quis, for it was well known that was no side of any question that might not be proved by such means. The noble maruuis had spoken of the remnants of the Navigation laws, but at any rate they were fragments of a mighty system which had fostered the growth of our commercial marine, arid provided a nursery of sea- men for our navy. Looking to the present state of Eurore, with a French force at Civita Yecehin, the Russians invading Kunwary, and the convulsive movement which agitated Germany— n. u.i mention the minor causes of discord which existed on all s.de* — he would ask the House if this was the proper moment to annihi- late our nursery of seamen, and to leave the country open to fore.gti attacK. He believed this measure was only introduced as a sop to the new school of Financial Reformers, and to shield tm: Government from the imputation of doing nothing if so, it was an example of dastardly boldness, which consisted in throwing the country into danger, while the Minister who endangered her existence escaped without any personal risk. 1 he discussion was then continued at considerable length, Lord GRAXVILI-E and the Duke of AHGVLI. speaking in support of URN measure, and Lord COI.CH;:STKH and the Earl of EU.EKEO::OUOH against- it. On the motion of the Earl' of CARLISLE, the debute w.:s ad- journed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY,…
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY, MAY 7. ROEBUCK took the oaths and his seat for Sheffield. Petitions were presented by Captain SOMERSET, from Mi'choi J toy and Cwmcarvan, iu the county of Monmouth, against the Alteration of Oaths Bill; by Mr. J. WILLIAMS, from a place in Wales, praying that no clergyman unacquainted with the WeLl: o language might be appointed in Wale.i. Un the order of the day for the second reading of the Parlia- mentary Cat lis Bill, Sir R. hGLIS opposed the bill, which, professing to alter the Parliamentary cat lis, was virtually and practically a Jew liil, whieh had been rejected last session by the House of Lords it moreover Filtered the general constitutional law of the land, whilst it deprived that House of its exclusively Christian character. Tak- ing this view of the measure, his arguments were, as Sir Robert admitted, substantially the same ¡¡s he had urged against the. bill. of 1847; and he moved the postponement of the second reading for six months. i.. This amendment was seconded by Major BEKTSFOKI), who denied that this was a great national object, for which any risks siiould be incurred, observing that the exclusion of Jews liom the
HOUSE OF LORDS.—FluoAY, MAY…
HOUSE OF LORDS.—FluoAY, MAY 4. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Mr. Charles Saun- ders, Secretary of the Great Western Railway Company, who complained that he had been represented as Secretary of the South Devon Company. Lord BEAUMONT gave notice that on Thursday next he should move that the Standing Order No. 130 be considered by the library committee, as, owing to the mal-construction of the House, it was impossible for the gentlemen who reported, in their present posi- tion, to give a correct account of the proceedings.
REBELS' COMPENSATION BILL…
REBELS' COMPENSATION BILL (CANADA). Lord STANLEY then asked whether any private correspondence had taken place respecting the Rebels' Compensation Bill in Canada, iocl A-hether the report was correct which asserted that this course of communication had been adopted in order to obviate the necessity of laying any official papers on the subject before the House ? Earl GREY replied that no official correspondence had taken place on the subject. He had, as all his predecessors had done, written private letters to the governors of colonies, but he should think he was departing from his duty if the official correspond- ence with those authorities did not contain every information that could be useful or necessary with regard to the government of the colonies under their control. Lord BROUGHAM expressed his entire satisfaction at the expla- nation given by Earl Grey.
high. They were constructed of pieces of old timber, which were covered with large sods of, grass. I called to the inmates, one of whom, after a great deal of hesitation, and not till I had assured him that I was no legal officer or landlord's deputy, came forth. His name was John Leahy. He was living in that shed, which was built by himself about, three weeks ago there were two other families besides his own living in it; they were Patrick Halloran and Mary Leahy. Halloran had three in family. Mary Leahy had four in family, and he himself had five. The shed was built; of part of the rafters of what was once his own house he had lived at Knockavuhig for the last twenty years, where he held a cabin and four acres of land at the rate of £ 4 a-year he was tenant to Mr. Pope, who held under Mr. Staughton; he got notice of ejectment from Mr. Mum, the solicitor of Trinity College, on the title, not for non-payment of rent, and was ejected and his house levelled two or three weeks ago he built a little shed on the ruins of his house, where he slept for three or four nights, but that was thrown down by Mr. Rice's man, who turned himself and his family adrift on the world, in a cold rainy night. He owed one year's rent at the time of his ejectment, and always paid regularly; is now in receipt of If stone of meal per week for the support of five in family." Dozens of similar cases are mentioned by the reporter. A special reporter, from the Cork Examiner, is now tra- versing the county of Kerry, and the accounts he furnishes to that journal of villages depopulated and cabins levelled n are really appalling. Subjoined is an extract from a com- munication dated Tralee, Monday evening Some months past, it becoming absolutely necessary that I should retrench my expenditure, I summoned my servants, six in number, explained to them my altered circumstances, and pro- posed a reduction in the wages of each one, in order that I might not be painfully obliged to dismiss some or any of them. They all rejected my proposal, and the three whom I therefore selected to remain in my service even refused to undertake the additional work which would have devolved upon them after the departure of the other three. There was but one alternative—to discharge all six, and hire three new servants. The dreadful result is as follows:—My quondam butler, unable to procure a comfortable situation as servant, was glad to accept temporary employment as clerk in a public office. His services having been dispensed with about a fortnight past, he is reduced to so deplorable a state of misery that he thankfully receives broken victuals from the table at which he might still have been feeding. My coachman fell among bad associates, compromised himself, and, finding it expedient to quit the country, he died of fever on the passage to New York. Mvcook is living in Little Geoige's -street, as general servant in a large family, her present wages being considerably lass than the reduced sum which I offered her. My wife's per. sonal attendant has sunk into prostitution; my housemaid has iecJ in the workhouse; and my laundrvmaid has been sent off with a workhouse party of emigrant girls to the Cape of Good Hope. Thus two have died miserably, one is starving, one is a prostitute, one is expatriated, and the sixth, in a very humble ser- vice, too late bitterly repents having quitted mine."