restated his objections to it, as proceeding on a novel principle, and violating the freehold property of the church. He moved, that the Bill be read a third time that day three months.

defended the Bill, on the principle that the acknowledged freehold property of the church was held on the condition of the duties being performed. All that was attempted was, that the incumbent who did not reside should provide the means for an officiating minister. The Bill, it was hoped, would diminish pluralities: 3,000 parishes were, at present, without either incumbent or curate resident. The licences for dissenting meeting houses had increased in 14 years from 90 to 508; and the licences for their preachers still more.

disapproved of the Bill, and considered the increase of licences to dissenters, owing to other causes; the greater part of the population in some manufacturing places being dissenters from the church.

thought the principle of the Bill quite unobjectionable; but had doubts respecting the means in which its object was to be obtained. It might possibly introduce unexampled embarrassments, and even beggary, into the church establishment. He stated a number of cases, in which the provisions, if executed, would be attended with great hardships. The Bill was also calculated to produce injurious impressions of the character of the church, and particularly of its heads. Above 800 livings were under 50l. a-year. The Bill had been altered, but so as to shew a distrust, while at the same time a discretionary power was left to the bishops. He was afraid of its consequences; but should be glad to change his opinions, if they were shewn to be unfounded.

spoke in favour of the Bill.

expressed his surprise, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have proposed the third reading of this Bill, at so late a period of the session. He thought it required further consideration; and hoped the right hon. gentleman would not object to postponing it to some future period.

was apprehensive that the tendency of the Bill would be to lower the character of the clergy. The higher emoluments of the church were the prizes held out to its professors, and the Bill might diminish the number of the objects of ambition to those who entered into the clerical profession. He wished for alterations; though not prepared to negative the measure.

opposed the Bill, which, he said, was considered objectionable by all the heads of the church.

The House then divided: For the Bill 66; Against it 9; Majority 57. The Bill was then read a third time. After which some new clauses were brought up and added to the Bill, by way of rider, and the Bill passed.

rose to move, in conformity with his notice, an Address to the Prince Regent, praying that he would be pleased to cause monuments to be erected to the memory of several distinguished officers who had recently fallen in the service of their country. There was, he observed, no description of commemoration for meritorious services which could be more grateful to the sentiments of officers when alive, or more soothing to the feelings of the friends and relatives of those who had fallen, than to receive from the liberality of parliament this memorial to their fame. The principles by which parliament were accustomed to regulate their conduct in this respect, were, first that the service rendered should have been conspicuous, and secondly, that it should be connected either with naval or military achievement. It was likewise the practice only to come to votes of this nature in the case of officers of a certain rank, and to whose conduct some arduous duty had been confided. He would now, having premised these general rules by which the proceedings of that House had hitherto been governed, shortly call their attention to some of the particulars attending the claims which the conduct of the deceased officers in question had upon the gratitude of parliament. The first whom he should name was major-general Bowes, who, although he had not fallen in a general action, had evinced that degree of gallantry and devotion in storming the forts of Salamanca previous to the engagement, and in returning to the contest after having been wounded in the breach, and obliged at first to retire, which amply entitled his memory to every honour that could be paid to military zeal. He fell, but his fall was graced by the complete success of his enterprize; an enterprize which, if it had not succeeded, might have materially detracted from the glories and advantages of the subsequent general engagement. The next officer was lieut.-colonel sir W. Myers, who fell in the battle of Albuera, commanding a brigade of fusileers, half of whom perished with their leader in the field. Although his rank therefore was not equal to that hitherto recognized in votes of this description, he trusted that it would not be deemed any departure from the spirit of the regulations observed on previous occasions to pay this tribute to the merits and acknowledged services of that gallant soldier. With respect to colonel Cadogan, the distinction which he had acquired for himself in the recent battle of Vittoria was still fresh in the recollection of the House, but there were other circumstances in his conduct at other places, and particularly at Fuentes d'Honore, which had attracted the attention of lord Wellington, and pointed him out to the country as one of its most rising military ornaments. It was impossible to advert to the last scene of his honourable career without an emotion of admiration, or to contemplate without ranking amongst the most decisive tokens of an heroic spirit, that generous ardour which prompted him after receiving his mortal wound, to express, as the wish at that moment nearest to his heart, to be conveyed to an eminence from which he might behold the conclusive and splendid triumph of that memorable day.—The other individual was the late major-general sir Isaac Brock. By the vigour of his mind and the comprehensiveness of his arrangements, that officer had been called to impart a confidence to the inhabitants of that part of Canada where he had commanded, and a sense of the value of their connection with this country, highly favourable to the frustration of the enemy's designs. But he had not rendered himself less distinguished in the field, in which with the loss of his own valuable life he had utterly discomfited the division of the American army commanded by general Hull. Taking all these circumstances, both of his life and death, into consideration, he felt satisfied that the intermediate delay which had been suffered to take place, would not dispose the House to refuse their concurrence with this vote, as holding forth an animating example to future officers who might be entrusted with similar duties in his Majesty's more remote dominions. It was, he felt, a most grateful task to record the examples of heroism, and to trace the career of victory, which had distinguished this country, and which had been, in latter times, carried to a degree of pre-eminence never before attained—never, perhaps, paralleled in military history. It was, indeed, a most grateful task to look back to such deeds, and to pay the debt of gratitude to those heroes who had contributed to produce them. In the enthusiasm, however, which such a review was calculated to excite, and the grateful feelings to which it must give rise, he would ever be unwilling to transgress the spirit which had heretofore influenced the practice of parliament in distributing its favours. But in this case there was no such transgression; and he was satisfied that there was no better mode of providing for the defence of the country—of laying by a stock of public spirit and personal valour, upon which national security could more safely repose, than in the proper distribution of national honours—because such distribution, while it distinguished the memory of the dead, furnished an incentive to the exertions of the living: thus conducing at once to maintain the glory and the safety of the empire. The noble lord concluded with moving Addresses to the Prince Regent, praying that Monuments may be erected in the Cathedral Church of Saint Paul, to the memory, I. of major-gen. Barnard Foord Bowes, who fell gloriously on the 27th of June 1812, while leading the troops to the assault of the forts of Salamanca; 2. of major-general sir Isaac Brock, extra knight of the most honourable order of the Bath, who fell gloriously at the head of his Majesty's troops on the 13th of October 1812, while, resisting an attack made by a very superior force of the enemy upon the port of Queenstown in Upper Canada: 3. of lieut. colonel sir William Myers, bart, who, fell gloriously in the command of a brigade of his Majesty's forces upon the 16th of May 1811, when the French army received a signal defeat at Albuhera, from the allied troops commanded by marshal sir William Carr Beresford: 4. of colonel the hon. Henry Cadogan, who fell gloriously in the command of a brigade of his Majesty's troops at the memorable battle of Vittoria, when a complete victory was gained over the French army by the allied forces under the command of the marquis of Wellington.

recommended that measures should be taken to abridge the expence usually attending the erection of such monuments, or at least that the ingenuity of the construction should in some degree be equal to the amount of the expence.

The several Addresses were then agreed to.

implored the noble lord not to press the third reading at present, but to allow the court of proprietors a reasonable time to read and consider the Bill in its amended shape. He then stated the resolution which had been this day come to by the court of proprietors, in which they called upon those directors who had seats in parliament, to move for a short delay for the purpose he had stated.

professed great respect for the court of proprietors, and a desire to conform to their wishes as far as he could in duty do so. The convenience of parliament, however, must not be forgotten. The session was now drawing to its close, and this was almost the only business before that House. Many gentlemen in that House, and many noble lords in the other, were, at great inconvenience to themselves, obliged to stay in town to attend the progress of this Bill. It was not, however, this personal inconvenience that he meant to dwell on, but the inconvenience of parliament itself, in being placed under the necessity of disposing of the Bill in its future stages with a very thin attendance of members, if there was now any unnecessary delay. He thought, however, that the reason which the court of proprietors had assigned for delay, should rather operate the other way, and make it necessary for the House to proceed. If they wanted to see the Bill in its perfect form, they should wait till it had passed the House, with all the amendments which might yet be introduced. If it passed the two Houses, they might then see it complete, and printed; and time might then be allowed them to make their option, whether they would accept it, or not. He did not suppose that any person would advise his royal highness the Prince Regent to give the royal assent to it, if the proprietors did not choose to accept it. As to the principle of the Bill, he thought that the court of proprietors could hardly expect that any observations which they might now make would be sufficient to alter the opinion which parliament had deliberately expressed after the maturest discussion. As to the details of the Bill, it must be recollected, that the House had the assistance of many of the directors, who must be supposed to be well acquainted with the opinions as well as the interests of the great body of proprietors. It should also be recollected, that this Bill was not unchangeable for the term of 20 years, but that any mistake which might have crept into it, could be remedied in another session, or any one of the details might hereafter be altered, if found necessary. The general principle of the Bill had already been decided on by parliament. He, therefore, should oppose any delay, which would necessarily cause the Bill in its remaining stages to be disposed of by a thinner attendance of members.

said a few words in favour of the delay that the court of proprietors asked.

opposed delay, on the same grounds which had been taken by lord Castlereagh.

reminded the noble lord and the House, that the time which he had all along suggested as the most proper for a short delay, was between the Report of the Bill and its third reading. He believed, that there was no instance in the Journals of parliament, of a Bill of such great magnitude being read a third time the very day after the Report was received. As for withholding the royal assent, was any minister prepared to advise his royal highness to put his veto on the Bill, if it should pass the two houses of parliament? It appeared to him no more than reasonable, that some short delay should now take place, (suppose till Friday next,) to give the proprietors time to read this Bill, with all its amendments, and consider whether they would accept it, or not.

The order of the day having been then read, and the question being put, that the Bill be now read a third time,

rose, and moved as an amendment, that instead of the word 'now,' the words "on Monday next, or Friday," (if more agreeable to the noble lord,) should be inserted.

would not consent to what appeared to him unnecessary gratuitous delay.

The House then divided; For Mr. Tierney's Amendment, 18; Against it, 57; Majority, 39.

The Bill was then read a third time. After which,

proposed a clause to allow the military officers of the Company, after a residence of 15 years in India, to be eligible to seats in the council. After dwelling for some time on the merits and services of the Indian army, he complained that the officers were much worse off than the officers in his Majesty's service. There was nothing to prevent the King's officers from holding any situation in this country, and yet the Company's military officers must not obtain seats in the council, nor even hold the office of military secretary. In the King's service there were honours and encouragements given to meritorious officers; whereas in the Company's service, the greatest poltroon, if he but contrived to escape the clutches of a court martial, was as sure of rising by seniority as if he had been the most meritorious officer. In the King's army, an officer who had served 20 years was always allowed to sell his commissions (even if he had not purchased them) at the regulation price, which would purchase an annuity of more value than the pension which an Indian officer would receive. He himself had served 19 years and nine months in the Indian army, and had no pension at all. He thought that the situation of the military officers of the Company ought to be improved.

sen. was fully sensible of the merits of the military servants of the Company, and should always be happy to concur in redressing any of their grievances; but did not think this should be done at the expence of the civil servants, whose ambition was naturally directed to those situations. Although there might be some things to amend in the state of the military servants, yet he believed that, upon the whole, there was no military service in the world where there was less reason to complain.

agreed with the opinion of the hon. director; and said, that it must be recollected, that the officers of the Indian army had their commissions and promotions without purchase; that after 25 years' service they might retire on full pay; and that if they chose to stay in India, they got the command of regiments (a very lucrative situation) sooner than the officers in the King's service usually did. He therefore thought the Indian army were as well off, upon the whole, as any other army. If, however, any improvements could be suggested, he should be happy to concur in their adoption. At the same time this was not the moment to decide upon a question which required very mature consideration. The present Bill would by no means embarrass parliament, or tie up their hands from any future regulations which might be advantageous both for the Company and the public interest. He recommended, therefore, the hon. baronet to withdraw this clause.

accordingly withdrew this clause, and proposed another for allowing military officers to be employed as political agents at the courts of the native princes. In support of this clause he instanced the services which had been rendered by sir Barry Close, sir J. Malcolm, and colonel Walker.

thought the clause superfluous, as the Company might at present do all which was proposed by this measure.

said, he could assert of his own knowledge, that repeated pointed orders came out from the government at home, forbidding the appointment of military men to diplomatic situations: this seemed as if it were a systematic principle of the directors, not to suffer the civil officers to be put in competition with the military. In his opinion the military were most fit for diplomacy in India.

senior, allowed that such orders had been issued in consequence of the complaint made by the civil officers, that they were too much superseded by the military. Upon the whole there was a pretty equal distribution of the employment. He thought this should be left to the discretion of the Company, and not be made a subject of legislative interference.

The clause was then negatived without a division.

proposed a clause to enable persons who had resided ten years in India, to retain their rank on their return to this country, without the votes of three-fourths of the proprietors.

said it was not the policy of the government to allow facilities to their experienced servants to return to England. The clause was negatived.

proposed a clause to abolish the decision by ballot, and directing the secretary to take the votes openly, as in the Indian presidency, while it should be competent for any members to protest; and also that absentees, on the requisition of two members, should assign the causes of their absence; and further, that notice of important questions should be given on demand of two members.

thought the clause too complex: it would be better if it were left to the Company, to adopt some regulation on this subject. It was not a case so glaring, as the decision by lot, which had last night been rectified.

had no objection to so much of the measure as abolished the ballot, though, he believed, no great inconvenience resulted from it. The rest of the measure, he thought, tended to degrade the directors, and impede their proceedings.

spoke to the same effect, observing, that he wished all possible publicity and responsibility should be attached to the votes of the directors.

then allowed his clause to be negatived without a division, on an understanding that the Company would adopt some such regulation as that proposed. It was unnecessary to extend the shield of a secret ballot over persons who were not likely to be influenced either by the civium ardor, or the vultus instantis tyranni.—It was then negatived.

No other clause being proposed, the House proceeded to amendments in the body of the Bill.

proposed an amendment in the appropriation clause, to the effect of making the bills payable in England fall on the territorial instead of the commercial fund, in the same way as if they were payable in India.

contended, as these debts were secured on the India revenue, the amendment was unnecessary.

on this, agreed to withdraw it; but on the fourth appropriation clause, be proposed an amendment, withdrawing great part of the commercial fund, to be employed by the Company, from under the controul of the Commissioners for the Affairs of India.

objected to this.

agreed, that so far as the Company had a commercial capital, neither that House nor the Board of Controul had any power to interfere. If the privilege here conceded to the Board of Controul were carried to excess, the affairs of the Company must stand still. If the country did not give to the Company in India, the Company could not give to the country in Europe.

was against the amendment.

The amendment was negatived after a short conversation.

When the Speaker arrived at the clause respecting the church of Scotland,

proposed that it should be omitted, arguing that a legislative enactment, commanding the Company to maintain chaplains or ministers in each of the presidencies would be impolitic, and might lead to misunderstandings in our other colonies.

observed, that the clause in question had originally been introduced at his suggestion, but that having received an assurance from the Company, that they would at their own expence maintain the Presbyterian ministers, and afford them all proper means and assistance in the promulgation and exercise of their faith, he had consented that the clause should be withdrawn.

said, that as chairman of the Court of Directors, he was confident he could assure the House, and particularly the Scotch members, that the East India Company would do not only all that was necessary, but all that could be reasonably required.

sen. confirmed this statement, and pledged the Company, as far he possessed the power, to endow churches, and provide maintenances for the clergymen of the church of Scotland.

doubted whether under the provisions of the charter of 10th W. 3, the Company could allow any ministers to proceed to India who had not the licence of the archbishop of Canterbury, unless under the higher sanction of a legislative enactment. He, therefore, proposed an amendment, that the clause should be retained, introducing the words, "it shall, and may be lawful for the Company to allow Presbyterian ministers to proceed to India."

could not answer for the archbishop of Canterbury, it was not his province, but he thought he might answer for the readiness of the Company.

After a few words from lord Castlereagh, Mr. Abercromby's amendment was negatived, and the clause was omitted, Mr. Abercromby, however, warned the Company, that he should narrowly watch their actions, and if they did not act up to the letter of their undertaking, he should submit a motion upon the subject next session, when he expected to be told, that it had been found impossible to carry the promise they had made into execution.

proposed several financial amendments in the appropriation clauses, which were severally negatived.

The Bill was then passed.